Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

Repetition

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Imposition of prison sentences involving the obligation to work as a punishment for expressing certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee previously noted that sentences of imprisonment (involving the obligation to work under section 23 of the Correctional Services Act, 2006) may be imposed under various provisions of the Penal Code in circumstances covered by Article 1(a) of the Convention, namely:

– section 65: prohibition of seditious statements;

– section 66: prohibition of seditious publications;

– sections 68, 69 and 70: assembly and riot; and

– section 120: defamation.

The Committee recalled that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, of persons who, without having recourse to violence, express political opinions or views opposed to the established political, social or economic systems. In order to ascertain that the above provisions are not applied to acts through which citizens seek to secure the dissemination and acceptance of their views, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of sections 65, 66, 68, 69, 70 and 120 of the Penal Code in practice, supplying copies of the court decisions defining or illustrating their scope. The Committee once again requests the Government to supply copies of the legislation in force in the following fields: laws governing the press and other media; laws governing political parties and associations; and laws governing assemblies, meetings and demonstrations.

Article 1(d). Penalties imposed for participation in strikes. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, pursuant to section 29(2)(a) of the Trade Disputes Act (2006), the Minister may, by Order and in case of emergency, prohibit persons employed in essential services from commencing a strike, or direct persons who are engaged in a strike, to terminate such a strike. Pursuant to section 29(5), any person who fails to comply with any direction or prohibition under this section shall be guilty of an offence. The Committee also observed that section 33A regulates procedures to be followed in case of a strike outside essential services. According to section 33A(2), any person contravening or failing to comply with any requirements of the procedure, shall be guilty of an offence. In this connection, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that violations of section 33A(2) may result in liability for offences, which, in turn, may result in convictions involving an obligation to perform compulsory labour in public prisons. Referring to paragraph 315 of its 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, the Committee recalls that, in all cases and regardless of the legality of the strike action in question, any sanctions imposed should not be disproportionate to the seriousness of the violations committed, and that the authorities should not have recourse to measures of imprisonment against persons peacefully organizing or participating in a strike. In light of the above, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures in order to ensure, both in law and in practice, that no sanctions involving compulsory labour can be imposed for the mere fact of organizing or peacefully participating in a strike. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of sections 29(5) and 33A(2) of the Trade Disputes Act (2006), supplying copies of relevant court decisions and indicating the penalties imposed.