Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) - Algeria (Ratification: 1962)

Other comments on C029

Observation

Direct Request

Display in: French - Spanish - ArabicView all

Article 2(1) of the Convention. Civil service. For several years the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the incompatibility with the Convention of sections 32, 33, 34 and 38 of Act No. 84-10 of 11 February 1984 concerning civil service, as amended and supplemented by Act No. 86-11 of 19 August 1986 and by Act No. 06-15 of 14 November 2006, under which it is possible to require persons who have completed a course of higher education or training to perform a period of civil service ranging from one to four years before being able to exercise an occupation or obtain employment. The Government indicated that civil service is a statutory period of work performed for a public administration, body or enterprise in local communities by persons to whom such an obligation applies. It represents a contribution of such persons to the economic, social and cultural development of the country.

The Committee also previously noted that, under sections 32 and 38 of the Act, any refusal to perform civil service and the resignation of the person concerned without a valid reason results in their being banned from exercising an activity on their own account, and that any infringement incurs the penalties laid down in section 243 of the Penal Code (imprisonment ranging from three months to two years and/or a fine of between 500 and 5,000 dinars). Similarly, under sections 33 and 34 of the Act, all private employers are required to ensure prior to engaging any workers, that applicants are not subject to civil service or that they can produce documentation proving that they have completed it. Furthermore, any private employer who knowingly employs a citizen who has evaded civil service is liable to imprisonment and a fine.

Moreover, the Committee noted that the list of branches concerned had first been limited to medicine, pharmacy and dental surgery and now only concerned doctors specializing in public health as a response to the need to bring essential specialists’ care to the populations of isolated regions. The Committee also noted that under section 2 of Ordinance No. 06-06 of 15 July 2006, civil service may be performed in private-sector health establishments in accordance with arrangements set forth by the regulation.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the service imposed under Act No. 84-10 concerning civil service, as amended, cannot be equated to forced labour, but is a national and moral duty of specialized doctors vis-à-vis the populations living in the regions of the far south, the south and in the High Plateaus. The Government adds that the sanctions provided for in sections 32, 33, 34 and 38 are more dissuasive than repressive and that, since the Acts were promulgated, not a single specialist has been prosecuted pursuant to those provisions. The Government further adds that specialized doctors and higher education teachers assigned to certain regions benefit from an attractive system of compensation ranging from 100 to 150 per cent of their principal remuneration, along with other advantages such as a housing allowance, a first installation allowance, the reimbursement of domestic consumption of gas and electricity, a 50 per cent reduction of their global income tax and special seniority and holiday arrangements. Given these advantages, a lot of specialists volunteer to work in those regions. Finally, the Government states that the whole issue of civil service for specialized doctors is still under discussion and is the subject of consultations among stakeholders.

Taking note of these indications, the Committee recalls that, although the persons required to perform civil service benefit from working conditions that are comparable to those of regular workers in the public sector (remuneration, seniority, promotion, retirement, etc.), they engage in this service under the threat of being denied access to any independent professional activity and to any form of employment in the private sector in the event of their refusal, which means that civil service falls within the concept of compulsory labour within the meaning of Article 2(1) of the Convention. Moreover, in so far as it consists of a contribution to the country’s economic development, such compulsory service also violates Article 1(b) of the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105), also ratified by Algeria.

The Committee once again expresses the strong hope that the necessary measures will be taken to repeal or amend the provisions of Act No. 84-10 of 11 February 1984 concerning civil service in the light of the Convention and Convention No. 105, and that the Government will soon be in a position to report on the measures adopted in this respect. Referring to Ordinance No. 06 06 of 15 July 2006 amending and complementing Act No. 84-10 of 11 February 1984 concerning civil service, the Committee reiterates the hope that the necessary measures will be taken to repeal or amend the provisions imposing civil service on specialized doctors. Pending such legislative amendments, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the number of people and establishments concerned by this civil service, the length of service and the conditions of work of the people concerned.

Article 2(2)(a). National service. For a number of years the Committee has been referring to Ordinance No. 74-103 of 15 November 1974 issuing the National Service Code and the Order of 1 July 1987, under which conscripts are required to take part in the running of various sectors of the economy and administration. The Committee observed that they are further required to perform civilian service for a period ranging from one to four years, as referred to above. The Committee recalled that, under the terms of Article 2(2)(a) of the Convention, compulsory military service is excluded from the scope of the Convention only where conscripts are assigned to work of a purely military character.

The Committee noted the Government’s indication in its previous report that, since 2001, there had no longer been recourse to the civilian modality of national service. The Government explained that this de facto suspension would be reflected in law as soon as the reform of the National Service Code was placed on the agenda. Noting an absence of new information regarding the reform of the National Service Code of 1974, the Committee accordingly requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, any developments in this regard that would bring national law into line with practice, as well as with the provisions of the Convention, and to provide copies of the relevant texts.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.