Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes that no report has been received from the Government. It must therefore repeat its previous observation on the following matters:

Article 1, paragraph 1, and Article 2, paragraphs 1 and 2(c), of the Convention

1. Since 1972, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to sections 24, 77, 81 and 82 of Decree No. 69-189 of 14 May 1969 (issued under sections 680 and 683 of the Criminal Procedure Code) which provide that prison labour may be hired to private individuals. The Committee has already recalled in numerous comments on this legislation that it is only when work is voluntarily accepted by prisoners and carried out in conditions similar to those of free employment relations (e.g. as to wages) that prison work for a private enterprise or person may be regarded as compatible with the Convention.

The Committee noted the Government’s statement that draft amendments to bring the abovementioned Decree into conformity with the provisions of the Convention had not yet been completed. The Committee requested the Government to provide information on any developments and any progress achieved in this regard.

In its latest report, the Government indicates that the new Constitution which devotes a section to human rights cannot maintain outdated provisions in the legislation. The Government has therefore decided to review all the texts containing provisions contrary to the spirit of the new Constitution. The Committee notes this statement and, since it has been making comments on the matter for a number of years, it hopes that the necessary measures will be adopted shortly and that the Government will be able to report on progress made in this matter.

2. In its last observation, the Committee referred to certain allegations concerning a widespread practice of migrant labourers, including children particularly from Mali and Burkina Faso, being forced to work on plantations against their will. The Committee requested the Government to supply information on this point.

The Committee notes the Government’s indications in its report that in Côte d’Ivoire undertakings are small and use family labour and sometimes migrants from neighbouring countries. These workers have ultimately established their own undertakings and, to develop them, they bring from their countries relatives and children whom they declare to be their families. This is how the recent practice of using child labour in Côte d’Ivoire has arisen, it has been aggravated by the principle of free circulation of goods and persons in the framework of ECOWAS and the hospitality of the Côte d’Ivoire which is a country of high immigration. The Government adds that Côte d’Ivoire is suffering this development but the real recruiters are not Ivorians. It indicates that in order to combat this scandalous and inhuman practice the Government has adopted specific, vigorous measures and actions such as: strengthening border controls; establishing a legal and institutional framework to combat trafficking of children; carrying out arrests, legal processes and criminal convictions for child traffickers in the courts; identifying children victims of trafficking and repatriating to their families and countries of origin; and carrying out public awareness measures. In addition, Côte d’Ivoire signed a bilateral cooperation agreement with Mali on 1 September 2000 to combat cross-border child trafficking.

The Committee notes the consolidated subregional project report of the International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour (ILO/IPEC, 2001) entitled "Combating Trafficking in Children for Labour Exploitation in West and Central Africa". According to this report, the children work in mines and plantations or as domestic servants. Most of those working in plantations come from Mali and Burkina Faso. The study reports on organization of trafficking, recruitment of children by intermediaries acting individually or in organized groups (the report states that in Côte d’Ivoire two employment agencies are involved in trafficking of children). According to the report, the intermediaries specialized in the domestic employment sector are Ivorian or Ghanaian while those in the mining sector are Burkinabé and Malian.

According to the report, employers in Ivorian plantations pay 50,000 FCFA (70 dollars) per child (half for transport costs and half for the child) while a mine owner pays 75,000 FCFA (105 dollars) per child (25,000 FCFA for transport costs and 50,000 for the child).

The Committee notes the information presented by Côte d’Ivoire to the Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC/C/8/Add. 41 of 27 April 2000) which states that the exploitation of child labour takes place also in the production of both goods and services: carpentry, catering, crafts, street trading, domestic work, engineering, mining, etc. The Government cites a study by a non-governmental organization, Defence for Children International (DCI), entitled "Child Labour in the Mines of Côte d’Ivoire, illustrated by the Tortiya and Issia mines", which reveals that 1,150 children are working in the Issia gold mine and Tortiya diamond mine. This child labour involves long hours and night work in violation of both the Convention on the rights of the child and domestic legislation, in particular the Labour Code which restricts the child’s working hours to eight hours a day and expressly prohibits night work (section 22.2). The situation is still worse in the case of girls, who are exploited sexually as well as economically (paragraphs 87 and 88). The report mentions the existence of child prostitution organized by networks and the fact that there are no specific legal provisions covering the sexual exploitation of children for commercial purposes.

The Committee notes the information in the December 2000 national report on monitoring the objectives of the World Summit for Children according to which 750 children work in the mines and around 15,000 children are victims of international trafficking, particularly from Mali towards Côte d’Ivoire.

The Committee notes from the various sources of information mentioned above that the Government is aware of the situation and that certain activities have been undertaken to combat child trafficking towards Côte d’Ivoire. The Committee notes that the new Constitution of 2000 lays down that forced labour is prohibited and punished by the law.

Article 25. Under Article 25 of the Convention, the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour shall be punishable as a penal offence, and it shall be an obligation on any Member ratifying this Convention to ensure that the penalties imposed by law are really adequate and are strictly enforced.

The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary action to sanction persons responsible for people trafficking for the purpose of labour exploitation and to communicate information on the number of legal procedures brought against those responsible and the sentences imposed.

The Committee requests the Government to supply a copy of the Code on the rights of the child, the report on the application of the agreement between Mali and Côte d’Ivoire, Act No. 88-686, the new Penal Code and the Penal Procedure Code.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.