Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It  hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Articles 1 (paragraph 1), and 2 (paragraph 1), of the Convention. 1. Legislation concerning vagrancy. The Committee previously noted that, in accordance with the Vagrancy Act (Cap. 10:25), any person suspected of being a vagrant, defined as any person who has no settled or fixed place of abode or means of support and who wanders from place to place, or any person who maintains himself by begging or in some other dishonest or disreputable manner (section 2(a) and (b)), is subject to being arrested by a police officer, taken before a magistrate and subsequently detained in a re-establishment centre. It also noted that, in such re-establishment centres, persons arrested as vagrants may be maintained and afforded the occupation, instruction or training requisite to fit them for entry into or return to employment (section 7(1)). The Committee has noted the Government’s repeated indication in its reports that no penalties are imposed under the Act upon those who do not seek employment. It also notes the Government’s indication in its latest report that vagrants that are arrested under the Act are not merely persons who habitually refuse to work, but those who “disturb public order and tranquillity”, and it is therefore appropriate to temporarily limit such persons’ right to freedom and place them in re-establishment centres for rehabilitation purposes.

While noting these indications, and referring also to the explanations provided in paragraph 88 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, the Committee reiterates its hope that measures will be taken to amend the Vagrancy Act, e.g. by limiting the scope of its provisions to the situations where the persons concerned disturb public order and tranquillity or engage in unlawful activities, in order to ensure compliance with the Convention. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee again requests the Government to supply information on the application of the Act in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating the scope of its provisions.

2. Freedom of career military personnel to leave their service. With regard to restrictions on the resignation of members of the military service, the Committee previously referred to section 17(1) of the Defence Act (Cap. 11:02), under which the resignation of an officer must, unless otherwise ordered by the Minister of Defence, be accepted by the President, and section 18(1) of the same Act, under which an officer holds his or her commission during the pleasure of the President. The Committee noted the Government’s indication in its 2005 report that the criteria applied by the President for accepting or rejecting the resignation of officers under section 17 of the Defence Act are governed by section 14(2) of the Defence (Regular Force) (Officer) Regulations, and that a notice of resignation can only be invalidated if made when an officer is preparing for deployment or is on leave, or if his or her unit is under inquiry. With regard to the resignation of non-commissioned members of the military service, the Committee noted that, under section 19(2) of the Defence (Regular Force) (Non-Commissioned Members) Regulations 1989, any member may, with the consent of the commander, resign during his period of engagement with three months notice in writing and upon the payment of any financial liabilities owed to the State.

Since the Government’s latest report contains no new information on this issue, the Committee again requests the Government to clarify the criteria that govern the granting of the consent by commanding officers required for the resignation of non-commissioned members of the military service, including any internal guidelines or orders. The Committee also requests the Government to supply a copy of the Defence (Regular Force) (Officer) Regulations, to which reference was made in the Government’s previous report.

Article 2, paragraph 2(a). Services exacted from a person in place of service as a member of a disciplined force. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that, under section 14(2)(c) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe, the expression “forced labour” does not include any labour required of a member of a disciplined force in pursuance of his duties as such or any labour required of any person by virtue of a written law in place of service as a member of such force. The Committee has also noted that section 4A(2)(c) of the Labour Relations Act, as amended by the Labour Relations Amendment Act 2002, contains a similar provision. Recalling that Article 2(2)(a) of the Convention exempts from its provisions “any work or service exacted in virtue of compulsory military service laws for work of a purely military character”, the Committee again requests the Government to clarify whether, by virtue of any enactment, any labour is required of a person in place of service as a member of any disciplined force, and to supply a copy of such enactment.

Noting also the Government’s indication in its report that all service required of members of the armed forces is in line with the regulations adopted under the Defence Act, which ensure that services exacted for military purposes are used for purely military ends, the Committee also asks the Government to indicate regulations which provide such guarantees and to provide a copy of such regulations with its next report.

Article 2, paragraph 2(c). 1. Prison labour exacted for the benefit of private individuals. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 71 of the Prisons (General) Regulations 1996, which prohibits prisoners to be employed for the private benefit of any person, except on the order of the Commissioner. It also noted the allegations of the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) concerning the use of prison labour for work on private farms and for building houses under the project “Operation Garikai”.

The Committee notes that, in its latest report, the Government has denied the allegations by the ZCTU as unfounded and confirmed its previous indication that no prisoners are used for the private benefit in contravention of the Convention. As regards the Government’s earlier indications concerning the steps taken to amend section 71 of the Prisons (General) Regulations, with a view to removing the powers of the Prison Commissioner provided for in this section, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that consultations are still going on as regards the need to amend it.

The Committee hopes that section 71 will soon be amended in order to ensure compliance with the Convention on this point and looks forward to receiving information on the developments in this regard.

2. Labour required of detained persons. As regards the provisions of section 4A(2)(b)(ii) of the Labour Relations Act, as amended by the Labour Relations Amendment Act 2002, which allows the exaction of labour from lawfully detained persons, if it is “permitted in terms of any other enactment”, in the absence of the sentence of a court and besides the labour performed in the interests of hygiene or for the maintenance of the place at which such persons are detained, the Committee previously noted the Government’s indication that there were no laws for the exaction of compulsory labour from detainees. The Committee also notes the Government’s statement in its latest report that it is not aware of any violations of the Convention in this respect and hopes that, in its future reports, the Government will keep the ILO informed of the adoption of any enactment referred to in section 4A(2)(b)(ii) and will communicate a copy for the examination by the Committee.

Article 2, paragraph 2(e). Minor communal services. With regard to the exaction of minor communal services, the Committee previously noted the Government’s indication in its report that communities identify development needs in their area and then mobilize themselves to undertake the work through the Village or Ward Development Councils. The Government states in its latest report that communal works are based on voluntary participation and on custom rather than legislative provisions, and that representatives of the community are always consulted.

The Committee would appreciate it if the Government would describe in more detail the organization of community works through the Village and Ward Development Councils and provide further information concerning the process of consultation of community members or their representatives by community leaders in regard to the need for such works.