115. We observe that the requirement for written particulars under section 27(4) of the Act is but an amelioration of the rights of employees, in general. In its wisdom, Parliament deemed it that where the number of employees is below 5, whether they are domestic workers or not, the employer is not obligated to provide the written particulars of employment. The limitation is thus duly prescribed by law. 116. Though inconvenient, as oral contracts are difficult to prove in Court, the 1st Claimant has failed to demonstrate that this is unreasonable. Further, we are firm that the fact that a majority of domestic workers would invariably end up within the bracket of 5 employees does not, in any way offend any of the constitutional provisions that have been cited. 117. More importantly, the ILO Convention No. 189 on information on terms and conditions of employment for domestic workers (Article 7) provides that domestic workers must be informed of their terms and conditions of employment in an easily understandable manner, preferably through a written contract. Thus, international law does not make it mandatory for States to provide written terms and conditions of employment to domestic workers. Considering the economic development of Malawi and the practical imperatives of requiring every domestic worker to have a written contract, it is our opinion that section 27(4) is currently necessary in an open and democratic society. Page 42 of 45