Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1992, Publication: 79th ILC session (1992)

The Government supplied the following information:

The Government considers that there is no contradiction between article 1 of Law No. 20 of 1962, article 6 of the Decree of 5 October 1955 and this Convention. The confinement provided for in section 1 of Law No. 20 of 1962 and the imprisonment provided for in section 6 of the Decree of 5 October 1955 do not combine with the obligation to work. In addition, even if labour was required during such confinement and imprisonment, it would be within the exception provided for in section 2, paragraph 2(c), of the Convention.

The Committee of Experts' statement that "... in both cases the persons concerned, who are merely suspected or accused, and detained by decision of judge, are obliged to work" is an incorrect interpretation of the provisions of the above-mentioned laws.

Section 71 of Law No. 40 of 1974 on service in the armed forces and section 108 of Law No. 55 of 1976 on resignations within the civil service, are contrary to the Convention. These provisions have been entrusted to the competent departments with a view to amending them.

In addition, a Government representative indicated that the blockade imposed on his country had made communication difficult with the ILO. The setting up of a new technical committee with responsibility for examining the observations of the Committee of Experts had been proposed by the Department of Vocational Training. Replies had been given to the comments of the Committee of Experts. With respect to the Convention, his Government believed that the comments on article 1 of Law No. 20 of 1962 were without foundation. This could be seen clearly in Article 2, paragraph 2(c), of the Convention, where there is an express exclusion of this type of work from the definition of forced or obligatory labour. The law of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya was in every respect in keeping with the provisions of the Convention. The interpretation of the Committee of Experts, viz., that persons suspected or accused of certain offences were subjected to forced labour, was also incorrect. The limitations imposed on the freedom of public servants and members of the armed forces to leave their employment was, it should be noted, the object of a re-examination at the present time.

The Workers' members welcomed the explanations given by the Government representative, which were incidentally of interest in view of paragraph 150 of the General Report of the Committee of Experts. It was difficult to continue a dialogue with governments if they failed to submit their reports to the Committee of Experts within the time-limits laid down. The Government apparently saw no contradiction between article 1 of Law No. 20 of 1962 and the Convention. The Committee of Experts was of a different opinion and undoubtedly had a reason for its opinion. When a government held an opinion different from that of the Committee of Experts, the Workers' members tended rather to side with the Committee of Experts, made up as it was of eminent legal experts. Only a detailed report by the Government would permit a definite opinion to be given. With respect to restrictions on the freedom of workers to leave their employment there was disquieting news concerning the position of Sri Lankan women employed in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. The Government was requested to submit detailed information on this matter. The Workers' members emphasised the necessity to submit reports on the application of ratified Conventions in order to permit a genuine dialogue within the Conference Committee.

The Employers agreed with the Workers' members. The first point concerned forced labour, which could be imposed on the basis of suspicion or accusation of certain offences; this was clearly in violation of the Convention. On this point they requested the Government representative to report to his Government that the Conference Committee shared the opinion of the Committee of Experts. On the second point concerning the possibility of leaving employment, if such a possibility were not envisaged this would be a violation of the Convention. It followed from the Government's written reply that it shared this opinion, inasmuch as an alteration of existing provisions had been envisaged. The Government could be invited to bring about this modification as soon as possible.

The Government representative informed the Workers' members that the new technical committee (the only one qualified to deal with these matters) would be informed of the question of bringing the Libyan law into line with the Convention. Even though the observations of the Committee of Experts might be relevant, there was no contradiction between the aforesaid provisions and the Convention. With respect to civil servants' freedom to resign, the matter had been referred to the competent authorities. With regard to the disquiet expressed by the Workers' members concerning the Sri Lankan women employed in the Libyan Arab Jamahirya, he had no information on the subject.

The Committee took note of the written and oral information submitted by the Government. It understood that the Government hoped that it was not in contradiction with the Convention. In view of the fact that the Government did not send a full report on the ratified Conventions in due time, the Committee felt it was not in a position to agree with the Government's viewpoint. As the subject-matter was of a very serious nature, the Committee urged the Government to reconsider its position so as to amend the legislation in the sense suggested by the Committee of Experts. The Committee hoped that the Government would submit to the ILO a report containing full particulars at its earliest convenience.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

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

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

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

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. Freedom of persons in the service of the State to terminate employment. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to certain provisions restricting the freedom of public servants and members of the armed forces to leave their employment (section 71 of Act No. 40 of 1974 regarding service in the armed forces; section 108 of Act No. 55 of 1976 regarding public service). The Committee pointed out that such provisions are incompatible with the Convention.

The Committee notes from the Government’s report that section 71 of Act No. 40 of 1974 regarding service in the armed forces has been amended by Act No. 7 of 2007, and the new text of this section provides that the resignation of members of the armed forces shall be accepted without any financial implications for them, before they have completed the legal period provided for in the contract. The Committee requests the Government to supply, with its next report, a copy of the full updated text of Act No. 40 of 1974 regarding service in the armed forces.

As regards the public service, the Committee recalls that, in its earlier comments, it noted the Government’s indication that a Bill entitled “Public Service Code” would be transmitted to the General People’s Congress with a view to its consideration and promulgation. Section 91(1) of the Bill provided that an employee may resign by applying in writing and that the competent authority must accept the application within 60 days of its submission. However, the Committee noted that paragraph 2 of the same clause stipulated that, if the resignation is linked to a condition or restriction, the employee’s service may end only when a favourable response is given to the application, otherwise the resignation will be cancelled 30 days after its submission; during that period, the resignation may be accepted with a deferment (section 91(3) of the Bill). The Committee asked the Government to describe the nature of the conditions or restrictions to which resignation may be linked, so that the Committee could ascertain whether they are consistent with the Convention.

The Committee notes that the Government’s report contains no information on this issue and hopes that such information will be provided in its next report. Noting also the Government’s confirmation in the report that the Bill includes a provision authorizing public servants to resign without any prior conditions, the Committee reiterates its firm hope that the abovementioned “Public Service Code” will be so drafted as to ensure that the various categories of persons in the service of the State are free to leave the service at their own initiative within a reasonable period of time, either at specified intervals or with previous notice. The Committee hopes that the Government will keep the ILO informed about the progress made in the adoption of the Bill and will supply a copy of the “Public Service Code”, as soon as it is promulgated.

2. Freedom of domestic workers to leave their employment. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted the Government’s indication, with regard to the regulations applying to domestic workers pursuant to section 1(b) of the Labour Code, that this clause was to be amended by the new draft Labour and Employment Code, which had to be submitted to the General People’s Congress with a view to its promulgation. The Government stated that, according to section 3 of the draft, the Code should apply to all the parties involved in work, including all domestic workers.

Since the Government’s report contains no new information on this issue, the Committee understands that the draft Labour and Employment Code has not yet been promulgated and hopes that the Government would provide a copy of the new Code, as soon as it is adopted.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. 1. Freedom of persons in the service of the State to terminate employment. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to certain provisions restricting the freedom of public servants and members of the armed forces to leave their employment (section 71 of Act No. 40 of 1974 regarding service in the armed forces; section 108 of Act No. 55 of 1976 regarding public service). The Committee pointed out that such provisions are incompatible with the Convention.

The Committee notes with interest from the Government’s report that section 71 of Act No. 40 of 1974 regarding service in the armed forces has been amended by Act No. 7 of 2007, and the new text of this section provides that the resignation of members of the armed forces shall be accepted without any financial implications for them, before they have completed the legal period provided for in the contract. The Committee requests the Government to supply, with its next report, a copy of the full updated text of Act No. 40 of 1974 regarding service in the armed forces.

As regards the public service, the Committee recalls that, in its earlier comments, it noted the Government’s indication that a Bill entitled “Public Service Code” would be transmitted to the General People’s Congress with a view to its consideration and promulgation. Section 91(1) of the Bill provided that an employee may resign by applying in writing and that the competent authority must accept the application within 60 days of its submission. However, the Committee noted that paragraph 2 of the same clause stipulated that, if the resignation is linked to a condition or restriction, the employee’s service may end only when a favourable response is given to the application, otherwise the resignation will be cancelled 30 days after its submission; during that period, the resignation may be accepted with a deferment (section 91(3) of the Bill). The Committee asked the Government to describe the nature of the conditions or restrictions to which resignation may be linked, so that the Committee could ascertain whether they are consistent with the Convention.

The Committee notes that the Government’s report contains no information on this issue and hopes that such information will be provided in its next report. Noting also the Government’s confirmation in the report that the Bill includes a provision authorizing public servants to resign without any prior conditions, the Committee reiterates its firm hope that the abovementioned “Public Service Code” will be so drafted as to ensure that the various categories of persons in the service of the State are free to leave the service at their own initiative within a reasonable period of time, either at specified intervals or with previous notice. The Committee hopes that the Government will keep the ILO informed about the progress made in the adoption of the Bill and will supply a copy of the “Public Service Code”, as soon as it is promulgated.

2. Freedom of domestic workers to leave their employment. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted the Government’s indication, with regard to the regulations applying to domestic workers pursuant to section 1(b) of the Labour Code, that this clause was to be amended by the new draft Labour and Employment Code, which had to be submitted to the General People’s Congress with a view to its promulgation. The Government stated that, according to section 3 of the draft, the Code should apply to all the parties involved in work, including all domestic workers.

Since the Government’s report contains no new information on this issue, the Committee understands that the draft Labour and Employment Code has not yet been promulgated and hopes that the Government would provide a copy of the new Code, as soon as it is adopted.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

1. Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Freedom of persons in the service of the State to terminate employment. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted the Government’s repeated indications that the provisions restricting the freedom of public servants and members of the armed forces to leave their employment (section 71 of Act No. 40 of 1974 regarding service in the armed forces; section 108 of Act No. 55 of 1976 regarding public service), which are contrary to the Convention, had been submitted to the competent authorities with a view to their amendment.

As the Committee repeatedly pointed out, referring also to the explanations in paragraphs 68 and 72 of its General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour, the effect of statutory provisions preventing termination of employment of indefinite duration by means of notice of reasonable length is to turn a contractual relationship based on the will of the parties into service by compulsion of law, and is thus incompatible with the Convention. Furthermore, the provisions relating to compulsory military service included in the Convention do not apply to career military service; therefore, persons who have voluntarily entered into an engagement may not be deprived of the right to leave the service in peacetime within a reasonable period, either at specified intervals, or with previous notice, subject to the conditions which may normally be required to ensure the continuity of the service.

While noting the Government’s renewed commitment to take the Committee’s comments into account when amending the abovementioned provisions, the Committee hopes that the necessary measures will at last be taken to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention on this point. Pending the revision, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of these provisions in practice, indicating the number of applications to resign accepted and refused, as well as the reasons for refusal. Please also supply a copy of the full updated text of the Act No. 40 of 1974 regarding service in the armed forces.

As regards the public service, the Committee recalls that, in its earlier comments, it noted the Government’s indication in its 2000 report that a Bill entitled "Public Service Code" would be transmitted to the General People’s Congress with a view to its consideration and promulgation. Section 91(1) of the Bill provided that an employee may resign by applying in writing and that the competent authority must accept the application within 60 days of its submission. However, paragraph 2 of the same clause stipulated that, if the resignation is linked to a condition or restriction, the employee’s service may end only when a favourable response is given to the application, otherwise the resignation will be cancelled 30 days after its submission; during that period, the resignation may be accepted with a deferment (section 91(3) of the Bill). The Committee asked the Government to describe the nature of the conditions or restrictions to which resignation may be linked, so that the Committee could ascertain whether they are consistent with the Convention.

Since the Government’s report contains no information on this issue, the Committee requests the Government to provide such information in its next report and reiterates firm hope that the provisions of the abovementioned "Public Service Code" will be so drafted as to ensure that the various categories of persons in the service of the State are free to leave the service at their own initiative within a reasonable period of time, either at specified intervals or with previous notice. The Committee asks the Government to keep the ILO informed about the progress made in the consideration and the adoption of the Bill and to supply a copy of the "Public Service Code", as soon as it is adopted.

2. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted the Government’s indication, with regard to the regulations applying to domestic workers pursuant to section 1(b) of the Labour Code, that this clause was to be amended by the new draft Labour and Employment Code, which had to be submitted to the General People’s Congress with a view to its promulgation. The Government stated that, according to section 3 of the draft, the Code shall apply to all the parties involved in work, including all domestic workers.

The Government indicates in its latest report that the draft Labour Code is still under preparation and has not yet been promulgated. The Committee would appreciate it if the Government would provide the text of the new Code as soon as it is adopted.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

The Committee notes the Government’s reply to its earlier comments.

1. Freedom of persons in the service of the State to terminate employment. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted the Government’s indications that the provisions restricting the freedom of public servants and members of the armed forces to leave their employment (section 71 of Act No. 40 of 1974 regarding service in the armed forces; section 108 of Act No. 55 of 1976 regarding public service), which are contrary to the Convention, had been submitted to the competent authorities with a view to their amendment.

The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication that a Bill entitled "Public Service Code" would be transmitted to the General People’s Congress with a view to their consideration and promulgation. Section 91(1) of the Bill provided that an employee may resign by applying in writing and that the competent authority must accept the application within 60 days of its submission. However, paragraph 2 of the same clause stipulated that, if the resignation is linked to a condition or restriction, the employee’s service may end only when a favourable response is given to the application, otherwise the resignation will be cancelled 30 days after its submission; during that period, the resignation may be accepted with a deferment (section 91(3) of the Bill). The Committee asked the Government to describe the nature of the conditions or restrictions to which resignation may be linked, so that the Committee could ascertain whether they are consistent with the Convention.

Since the Government’s report contains no information on this issue, the Committee requests the Government to provide such information in its next report and reiterates firm hope that the provisions of the abovementioned "Public Service Code" will be so drafted as to ensure that the various categories of persons in the service of the State are free to leave the service at their own initiative within a reasonable period of time, either at specified intervals or with previous notice. The Committee asks the Government to supply a copy of the "Public Service Code", as soon as it is adopted.

As regards service in the armed forces, the Committee repeats its request for information on the measures taken to amend section 71 of Act No. 40 of 1974 referred to above.

2. As regards the freedom of domestic workers to leave their employment, in relation to the situation of Sri Lankan women employed in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, the Committee has noted the Government’s indication in the report that no such cases involving Sri Lankan domestic workers or domestic workers of other nationalities have been reported.

The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication concerning the regulations applying to domestic workers pursuant to section 1(b) of the Labour Code, that this clause was to be amended by the new draft Labour and Employment Code, which had to be submitted to the General People’s Congress with a view to its promulgation. The Government stated that, according to section 3 of the draft, the Code shall apply to all the parties involved in work, including all domestic workers.

The Committee notes from the Government’s latest report that the new Labour Code has not yet been promulgated. It would be grateful if the Government would provide the text of the new Code as soon as it is adopted.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s reply to its earlier comments. It notes in particular the information supplied by the Government in reply to its 1998 general observation concerning prison labour.

1. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indications that the restrictions placed on the freedom of public servants and members of the armed forces to leave their employment under the provisions relating to resignation contained in section 71 of Act No. 40 of 1974 regarding service in the armed forces, and in section 108 of Act No. 55 of 1976 regarding public service, which are contrary to the Convention, had been submitted to the competent authorities with a view to their modification.

The Government indicated in its previous report that measures had already been taken to amend the abovementioned provisions; it stated that a Bill entitled "Public Service Code" would be transmitted to the general people’s congress with a view to their consideration and promulgation. The Committee noted that section 91(1) of the Bill provided that an employee may resign by applying in writing and that the competent authority must accept the application within 60 days of its submission. However, paragraph 2 of the same clause stipulated that, if the resignation is linked to a condition or restriction, the employee’s service may end only when a favourable response is given to the application, otherwise the resignation will be cancelled 30 days after its submission; during that period, the resignation may be accepted with a deferment (section 91(3)). Referring to the explanations given in paragraphs 67-73 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, the Committee observed that the provisions of paragraphs 2 and 3 of section 91 of the Bill contained restrictions on the freedom of employees to terminate their employment, which affected observance of the Convention. It asked the Government to describe the nature of the conditions or restrictions to which resignation may be linked under paragraph 2 of section 91, so that the Committee could ascertain whether they are consistent with the Convention.

The Government indicates in its latest report that the Bill referred to above has not yet been promulgated. The Committee expresses strong hope that the provisions in question will be so drafted as to ensure that the various categories of persons in the service of the State are free to leave the service at their own initiative within a reasonable period of time, either at specified intervals or with previous notice. It reiterates its hope that the Government will shortly be in a position to provide a copy of the provisions adopted to this end. It also repeats its request for information on the measures taken to amend section 71 of Act No. 40 of 1974 with regard to service in the armed forces, to which the Government referred in its previous report.

2. In its earlier comments, the Committee recalled the discussion that took place in the Conference Committee in June 1992 during which the Worker members of the Conference Committee observed, regarding the freedom of workers to leave their employment, that the information on the situation of Sri Lankan women employed in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya was disquieting. It noted that the Conference Committee had expressed the hope that the Government would keep the Office informed by means of a report containing detailed information.

The Committee notes that the Government reiterates its previous statement in the report that there are no cases pending concerning Sri Lankan women employees in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. It noted the Government’s indication in its previous report, concerning the regulations applying to domestic workers pursuant to section 1(b) of the Labour Code, that this clause was to be amended by the new draft Labour and Employment Code, which had to be submitted to the general people’s congress with a view to its promulgation. The Government indicated that, according to section 3 of the draft, the Code shall apply to all the parties involved in work, including all domestic workers.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its latest report that the new Code is still under discussion. It would be grateful if the Government would provide the text of the new Code as soon as it is adopted, and continue to provide detailed information in its future reports on the situation of Sri Lankan women employed in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya in connection with the freedom to leave their employment.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in reply to its earlier comments.

1.  In its earlier comments the Committee noted the Government’s indications that the restrictions placed on the freedom of public servants and members of the armed forces to leave their employment under the provisions relating to resignation contained in section 71 of Act No. 40 of 1974 regarding service in the armed forces, and in section 108 of Act No. 55 of 1976 regarding public service, which are contrary to the Convention, had been submitted to the competent authorities with a view to their modification.

The Committee notes from the Government’s report that measures have already been taken to amend the abovementioned provisions. The Government states that there is to be a new Bill entitled "Public Service Code" which has already been prepared and will be transmitted to the general people’s congress with a view to their consideration and promulgation. The Committee notes that section 91(1) of the new Bill provides that an employee may resign by applying in writing and that the competent authority must accept the application within 60 days of its submission. However, paragraph 2 of the same clause stipulates that, if the resignation is linked to a condition or restriction, the employee’s service may end only when a favourable response is given to the application, otherwise the resignation will be cancelled 30 days after its submission; during that period, the resignation may be accepted with a deferment (section 91(3)). The Committee refers to the explanations given in paragraphs 67-73 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, and observes that the provisions of paragraphs 2 and 3 of section 91 of the new Bill contain restrictions on the freedom of employees to terminate their employment, which affect observance of the Convention. It asks the Government to describe the nature of the conditions or restrictions to which resignation may be linked under paragraph 2 of section 91, so that the Committee may ascertain whether they are consistent with the Convention. It trusts that the provisions in question will be so drafted as to ensure that the various categories of persons in the service of the State are free to leave the service at their own initiative within a reasonable period of time, either at specified intervals or with previous notice. It hopes that the Government will shortly be in a position to provide a copy of the provisions adopted to this end. Please also provide information on the measures taken to amend section 71 of Act No. 40 of 1974 with regard to service in the armed forces, to which the Government refers in its report.

2.  In its earlier comments, the Committee recalled the discussion that took place in the Conference Committee in June 1992 during which the Worker members of the Conference Committee observed, regarding the freedom of workers to leave their employment, that the information on the situation of Sri Lankan women employed in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya was disquieting. It noted that the Conference Committee had expressed the hope that the Government would keep the Office informed by means of a report containing detailed information.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement in its report that there are no cases pending concerning Sri Lankan women employees in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. The Government also indicates, concerning the regulations applying to domestic workers pursuant to section 1(b) of the Labour Code that this clause has been amended by the new draft of the Labour and Employment Code which will be submitted to the general people’s congress with a view to its promulgation. According to the Government, section 3 of the draft provides that the Code applies to all the parties involved in work, including all domestic workers. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide the text of the new Code as soon as it is adopted, and continue to provide detailed information in its future reports on the situation of Sri Lankan women employed in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya in connection with the freedom to leave their employment.

3.  With reference to its general observation on the Convention contained in its report submitted to the 87th Session of the Conference in 1999, the Committee notes that the Government’s report does not contain the information requested in its previous comments concerning prison labour. Consequently, it again asks the Government to provide information on the present position in law and practice as regards:

(i)  whether there are prisons administered by private concerns, profit-making or otherwise;

(ii)  whether any private prison contractors deploy prisoners to work either inside or outside prison premises, either for the account of the contractor or for that of another enterprise;

(iii)  whether private parties are admitted by the prison authorities into prison premises of any kind for the purpose of engaging prisoners in employment;

(iv)  whether employment of prisoners outside prison premises, either for a public authority or for a private enterprise, is allowed;

(v)  the conditions in which employment under any of the above conditions takes place, in respect of remuneration (indicating the level and comparing it with the minimum wage normally applicable to such work), benefits accruing (such as pension rights and workers’ compensation), observance of occupational safety and health legislation and other conditions of employment (e.g. through labour inspection), and how those conditions are determined;

(vi)  what the source of any remuneration is (whether from public or private funds) and for what purposes it must or may be applied (e.g. for the personal use of the prisoner or if it is subject to compulsory deductions);

(vii)  for whose benefit is the product of prisoners’ work and surplus profit deriving from it, after deduction of overheads, and how it is disbursed;

(viii)  how the consent of the prisoners concerned is guaranteed, so that they are free from the menace of any penalty, including any loss of privileges or other disadvantages following from a refusal to work.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

The Committee notes with regret 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 following matters raised in its previous comments: 1. In its earlier comments the Committee noted the Government's indications that the restrictions placed on the freedom of public servants and members of the armed forces to leave their employment under the provisions relating to resignation contained in section 71 of Act No. 40 of 1974 respecting service in the armed forces and in section 108 of Act No. 55 of 1976 respecting the public service, which are contrary to the Convention, had been submitted to the competent authorities with a view to their modification. The Committee noted from the Government's latest report received in 1995 that the decision to submit the above-mentioned provisions to the competent authorities for amendment has been confirmed. It therefore trusts that the provisions concerned will now be amended so as to ensure that the various categories of persons in the service of the State are free to leave the service at their own initiative within a reasonable period of time, either at specified intervals or with previous notice. It hopes that the Government will soon be in a position to supply a copy of the provisions adopted to this end. 2. With reference to the discussion which took place in the Conference Committee in June 1992, the Committee recalled the statement made by the Worker members, regarding the freedom of workers to leave their employment, that the information on the situation of Sri Lankan women employed in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya was disquieting. It noted that the Conference Committee expressed the hope that the Government would keep the ILO informed by means of a report containing detailed information. The Committee observes that no information on the subject has been received from the Government so far. It therefore reiterates its request to the Government to supply full and detailed information on this matter, as well as copy of the regulations applicable to domestic workers under section 1(b) of the Labour Code. 3. Referring to the general observation on the Convention made in its report to the 87th Session of the ILC (1999), the Committee requests the Government to include in its next report information as to the present position in law and practice as regards:

(i) whether there are prisons administered by private concerns, profit-making or otherwise;

(ii) whether any private prison contractors deploy prisoners to work either inside or outside prison premises, either for the account of the contractor or for that of another enterprise;

(iii) whether private parties are admitted by the prison authorities into prison premises of any kind for the purpose of engaging prisoners in employment;

(iv) whether employment of prisoners outside prison premises, either for a public authority or for a private enterprise, is allowed;

(v) the conditions in which employment under any of the above conditions takes place, in respect of remuneration (indicating the level and comparing it with minimum wage normally applicable to such work), benefits accruing (such as pension rights and workers' compensation), observance of occupational safety and health legislation and other conditions of employment (e.g. through labour inspection), and how those conditions are determined;

(vi) what the source of any remuneration is (whether from public or private funds) and for what purposes it must or may be applied (e.g. for the personal use of the prisoner or if it is subject to compulsory deductions);

(vii) for whose benefit is the product of prisoners' work and any surplus profit deriving from it, after deduction of overheads, and how it is disbursed;

(viii) how the consent of the prisoners concerned is guaranteed, so that t is free from the menace of any penalty, including any loss of privileges or other disadvantages following from a refusal to work.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee notes with regret 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:

1. In its earlier comments the Committee noted the Government's indications that the restrictions placed on the freedom of public servants and members of the armed forces to leave their employment under the provisions relating to resignation contained in section 71 of Act No. 40 of 1974 respecting service in the armed forces and in section 108 of Act No. 55 of 1976 respecting the public service, which are contrary to the Convention, had been submitted to the competent authorities with a view to their modification.

The Committee noted from the Government's latest report received in 1995 that the decision to submit the above-mentioned provisions to the competent authorities for amendment has been confirmed. It therefore trusts that the provisions concerned will now be amended so as to ensure that the various categories of persons in the service of the State are free to leave the service at their own initiative within a reasonable period of time, either at specified intervals or with previous notice. It hopes that the Government will soon be in a position to supply a copy of the provisions adopted to this end.

2. With reference to the discussion which took place in the Conference Committee in June 1992, the Committee recalled the statement made by the Worker members, regarding the freedom of workers to leave their employment, that the information on the situation of Sri Lankan women employed in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya was disquieting. It noted that the Conference Committee expressed the hope that the Government would keep the ILO informed by means of a report containing detailed information. The Committee observes that no information on the subject has been received from the Government so far. It therefore reiterates its request to the Government to supply full and detailed information on this matter, as well as copy of the regulations applicable to domestic workers under section 1(b) of the Labour Code.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

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:

1. In its earlier comments the Committee noted the Government's indications that the restrictions placed on the freedom of public servants and members of the armed forces to leave their employment under the provisions relating to resignation contained in section 71 of Act No. 40 of 1974 respecting service in the armed forces and in section 108 of Act No. 55 of 1976 respecting the public service, which are contrary to the Convention, had been submitted to the competent authorities with a view to their modification.

The Committee noted from the Government's latest report received in 1995 that the decision to submit the above-mentioned provisions to the competent authorities for amendment has been confirmed. It therefore trusts that the provisions concerned will now be amended so as to ensure that the various categories of persons in the service of the State are free to leave the service at their own initiative within a reasonable period of time, either at specified intervals or with previous notice. It hopes that the Government will soon be in a position to supply a copy of the provisions adopted to this end.

2. With reference to the discussion which took place in the Conference Committee in June 1992, the Committee recalled the statement made by the Worker members, regarding the freedom of workers to leave their employment, that the information on the situation of Sri Lankan women employed in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya was disquieting. It noted that the Conference Committee expressed the hope that the Government would keep the ILO informed by means of a report containing detailed information. The Committee observes that no information on the subject has been received from the Government so far. It therefore reiterates its request to the Government to supply full and detailed information on this matter, as well as copy of the regulations applicable to domestic workers under section 1(b) of the Labour Code.

REQUESTS The Government is asked to report in detail in 1997. #REPORT_DATE:00:00:1997

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its earlier comments.

1. In its earlier comments the Committee noted the Government's indications that the restrictions placed on the freedom of public servants and members of the armed forces to leave their employment under the provisions relating to resignation contained in section 71 of Act No. 40 of 1974 respecting service in the armed forces and in section 108 of Act No. 55 of 1976 respecting the public service, which are contrary to the Convention, had been submitted to the competent authorities with a view to their modification.

The Committee notes from the Government's latest report received in 1995 that the decision to submit the above-mentioned provisions to the competent authorities for amendment has been confirmed. It therefore trusts that the provisions concerned will now be amended so as to ensure that the various categories of persons in the service of the State are free to leave the service at their own initiative within a reasonable period of time, either at specified intervals or with previous notice. It hopes that the Government will soon be in a position to supply a copy of the provisions adopted to this end.

2. With reference to the discussion which took place in the Conference Committee in June 1992, the Committee recalls the statement made by the Worker members, regarding the freedom of workers to leave their employment, that the information on the situation of Sri Lankan women employed in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya was disquieting. It noted that the Conference Committee expressed the hope that the Government would keep the ILO informed by means of a report containing detailed information. The Committee observes that no information on the subject has been received from the Government so far. It therefore reiterates its request to the Government to supply full and detailed information on this matter, as well as copy of the regulations applicable to domestic workers under section 1(b) of the Labour Code.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 1997.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

The Committee notes with regret that no report has been received from the Government. 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 following matters raised in its previous direct request:

The Committee noted the Government's report dated 28 May 1992 and the information supplied by the Government to the Conference Committee in June 1992.

1. The Committee noted the information supplied by the Government in its report to the effect that the provisions relating to resignation contained in section 71 of Act No. 40 of 1974 respecting service in the armed forces and in section 108 of Act No. 55 of 1976 respecting the public service are contrary to the Convention and have been submitted to the competent authorities with a view to their modification. It also noted the information supplied by the Government to the Conference Committee that the restrictions placed on the freedom of public servants and members of the armed forces to leave their employment will be re-examined.

The Committee hopes that the envisaged modifications will ensure that the various categories of persons in the service of the State are free to leave its service at their own initiative within a reasonable period of time either at specified intervals or with previous notice. It again requests the Government to supply information on the progress made in the work of revising these texts.

2. The Committee noted the information supplied by the Government in reply to its previous comments on training for employment in reformation centres.

3. The Committee noted that the Worker members of the Conference Committee commented, with regard to the freedom of workers to leave their employment, that the information on the situation of Sri Lankan women employed in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya was disquieting. It noted that the Government representative stated that he had no information on that subject. It also noted that the Conference Committee expressed the hope that the Government would keep the ILO informed by means of a report containing detailed information.

The Committee again requests the Government to supply full and detailed information on this subject. It also requests the Government to supply the text of the regulations applicable to domestic workers under section 1(b) of the Labour Code.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

The Committee notes that no report has been received from the Government. 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 following matters raised in its previous direct request:

The Committee noted the Government's report dated 28 May 1992 and the information supplied by the Government to the Conference Committee in June 1992.

1. The Committee noted the information supplied by the Government in its report to the effect that the provisions relating to resignation contained in section 71 of Act No. 40 of 1974 respecting service in the armed forces and in section 108 of Act No. 55 of 1976 respecting the public service are contrary to the Convention and have been submitted to the competent authorities with a view to their modification. It also noted the information supplied by the Government to the Conference Committee that the restrictions placed on the freedom of public servants and members of the armed forces to leave their employment will be re-examined.

The Committee hopes that the envisaged modifications will ensure that the various categories of persons in the service of the State are free to leave its service at their own initiative within a reasonable period of time either at specified intervals or with previous notice. It again requests the Government to supply information on the progress made in the work of revising these texts.

2. The Committee noted the information supplied by the Government in reply to its previous comments on training for employment in reformation centres.

3. The Committee noted that the Worker members of the Conference Committee commented, with regard to the freedom of workers to leave their employment, that the information on the situation of Sri Lankan women employed in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya was disquieting. It noted that the Government representative stated that he had no information on that subject. It also noted that the Conference Committee expressed the hope that the Government would keep the ILO informed by means of a report containing detailed information.

The Committee again requests the Government to supply full and detailed information on this subject. It also requests the Government to supply the text of the regulations applicable to domestic workers under section 1(b) of the Labour Code.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

The Committee notes the Government's report dated 28 May 1992 and the information supplied by the Government to the Conference Committee in June 1992.

1. The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report to the effect that the provisions relating to resignation contained in section 71 of Act No. 40 of 1974 respecting service in the armed forces and in section 108 of Act No. 55 of 1976 respecting the public service are contrary to the Convention and have been submitted to the competent authorities with a view to their modification. It also notes the information supplied by the Government to the Conference Committee that the restrictions placed on the freedom of public servants and members of the armed forces to leave their employment will be re-examined.

The Committee hopes that the envisaged modifications will ensure that the various categories of persons in the service of the State are free to leave its service at their own initiative within a reasonable period of time either at specified intervals or with previous notice. It requests the Government to supply information on the progress made in the work of revising these texts.

2. The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in reply to its previous comments on training for employment in reformation centres.

3. The Committee notes that the Worker members of the Conference Committee commented, with regard to the freedom of workers to leave their employment, that the information on the situation of Sri Lankan women employed in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya was disquieting. It notes that the Government representative stated that he had no information on that subject. It also notes that the Conference Committee expressed the hope that the Government would keep the ILO informed by means of a report containing detailed information.

The Committee requests the Government to supply full and detailed information on this subject. It also requests the Government to supply the text of the regulations applicable to domestic workers under section 1(b) of the Labour Code.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

1. In the comments that it has been making for many years, the Committee has referred to the provisions of section 1 of Act No. 20 of 1962 under which, among other provisions, certain women seriously suspected or accused of certain offences against morality may be interned for a period of from six months to three years. The Committee has also referred to section 6 of the Royal Decree of 5 October 1955 concerning vagabonds and suspects, under which any person who has already been sentenced for certain offences or been the subject of repeated investigations for the same offences and is again suspected of such offences is liable to detention of from one to five years by decision of a judge. The Committee understands that in both cases the persons concerned, who are merely suspected or accused, and detained by decision of a judge, are obliged to work.

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report, and in particular the reports of the national committee set up to examine international labour Conventions and Recommendations, which considers that there is no disparity between the above texts and the Convention.

As the Committee pointed out in paragraphs 89 to 93 of its 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour, it follows from Article 2, paragraph 2(c), of the Convention that compulsory labour imposed as correction or punishment falls outside the scope of the Convention only if certain conditions are met; first of all, the labour must be imposed "as a consequence of a conviction". Therefore, persons who are in detention but have not been convicted - such as prisoners awaiting trial or persons detained without trial - should not be obliged to perform labour. Furthermore, the term "conviction" indicates that the person concerned must have been found guilty of an offence. In the absence of such a finding of guilt, compulsory labour may not be imposed, even as a result of a decision by a court of law. Accordingly, the above provisions of the Act of 1962 and the Royal Decree of 1955 are contrary to the Convention.

2. The Committee has observed for several years that the Government's report contains no information in reply to the general direct request of 1981, in which the Committee referred to paragraphs 67 to 73 of its 1979 General Survey, concerning restrictions on the freedom of workers to leave their employment. It observed that, in a number of countries, the conditions of service for certain persons in the service of the State, particularly career members of the armed forces, are governed by legal provisions that make the right to leave the service dependent upon authorisation. In certain cases, a link is established between the duration of training received and that of the services normally required before resignation is accepted. Since such restrictions may have a bearing on the application of the Convention concerning forced or compulsory labour, the Committee again asks the Government to provide information on national law and practice concerning the situation of the various classes of persons in the service of the State, particularly in respect of their freedom to leave the service on their own initiative within a reasonable period, either at specified intervals or with previous notice.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

1. In comments that it has been making for many years, the Committee has referred to the provisions of section 1 of Act No. 20 of 1962 under which, among other things, certain women seriously suspected or accused of certain offences against morality may be interned for a period of from six months to three years. The Committee has also referred to section 6 of the Royal Decree of 5 October 1955 concerning vagabonds and suspects under which any person who has already been sentenced for certain offences or been the subject of repeated investigations for the same offences and is again suspected of such offences is liable to detention of from one to five years by decision of a judge. The Committee understands that in both cases the persons concerned, who are merely suspected or accused and detained by decision of a judge, are obliged to work. The Committee noted from the Government's report received in 1988 that the committee charged with examination of international labour Conventions and Recommendations, after examining the observations of the Committee of Experts and the responses communicated by the competent authorities on the subject raised by the Committee, asked for additional information from the ILO. As the Committee pointed out in paragraphs 89 to 93 of its 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour, it follows from Article 2, paragraph 2(c), of the Convention that compulsory labour imposed as correction or punishment falls outside the scope of the Convention only if certain conditions are met; first of all, the labour must be imposed "as a consequence of a conviction". Therefore, persons who are in detention but have not been convicted - such as prisoners awaiting trial or persons detained without trial - should not be obliged to perform labour. Furthermore, the term "conviction" indicates that the person concerned must have been found guilty of an offence. In the absence of such a finding of guilt, compulsory labour may not be imposed, even as a result of a decision by a court of law. Accordingly, the provisions of section 1 of Act No. 20 of 1962 and section 6 of the Royal Decree of 5 October 1955, referred to above, are contrary to the Convention. The Committee hopes that in the light of these indications, the necessary measures will soon be taken to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention so as to ensure that no work may be imposed on detainees who are merely accused or suspected of certain crimes, and that the Government will indicate the action taken. 2. The Committee has observed that for several years the report of the Government contained no information in reply to the general direct request of 1981, in which the Committee referred to paragraphs 67 to 73 of its General Survey of 1979 on the Abolition of Forced Labour, concerning restrictions on the freedom of workers to leave their employment. It observed that, in a number of countries, the conditions of service of certain persons in the service of the State, particularly career members of the armed forces, are governed by legal provisions that make the right to leave the service dependent upon authorisation. In certain cases a link is established between the duration of training received and that of the services normally required before resignation is accepted. Since such restrictions may have a bearing on the application of the Conventions concerning forced or compulsory labour, the Committee again asks the Government to provide information on national law and practice concerning the situation of the various classes of persons in the service of the State, particularly in respect of freedom to leave the service on their own initiative within a reasonable period, either at specified intervals or with previous notice.

TEXT

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

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

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

1. In comments that it has been making for many years, the Committee has referred to the provisions of section 1 of Act No. 20 of 1962 under which, among other things, c ertain women seriously suspected or accused of certain offences against morality may be interned for a period of from six months to three years. The Committee has also referred to section 6 of the Royal Decree of 5 October 1955 concerning vagabonds and suspects under which any person who has already been sentenced for certain offences or been the subject of repeated investigations for the same offences and is again suspected of such offences is liable to detention of from one to five years by decision of a judge. The Committee understands that in both cases the persons concerned, who are merely suspected or accused and detained by decision of a judge, are obliged to work. The Committee noted from the Government's report received in 1988 that the committee charged with examination of international labour Conventions and Recommendations, after examining the observations of the Committee of Experts and the responses communicated by the competent authorities on the subject raised by the Committee, asked for additional information from the ILO. As the Committee pointed out in paragraphs 89 to 93 of its 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour, it follows from Article 2, paragraph 2(c), of the Convention that compulsory labour imposed as correction or punishment falls outside the scope of the Convention only if certain conditions are met; first of all, the labour must be imposed "as a consequence of a conviction". Therefore, persons who are in detention but have not been convicted - such as prisoners awaiting trial or persons detained without trial - should not be obliged to perform labour. Furthermore, the term "conviction" indicates that the person concerned must have been found guilty of an offence. In the absence of such a finding of guilt, compulsory labour may not be imposed, even as a result of a decision by a court of law. Accordingly, the provisions of section 1 of Act No. 20 of 1962 and section 6 of the Royal Decree of 5 October 1955, referred to above, are contrary to the Convention. The Committee hopes that in the light of these indications, the necessary measures will soon be taken to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention so as to ensure that no work may be imposed on detainees who are merely accused or suspected of certain crimes, and that the Government will indicate the action taken. 2. The Committee has observed that for several years the report of the Government contained no information in reply to the general direct request of 1981, in which the Committee referred to paragraphs 67 to 73 of its General Survey of 1979 on the Abolition of Forced Labour, concerning restrictions on the freedom of workers to leave their employment. It observed that, in a number of countries, the conditions of service of certain persons in the service of the State, particularly career members of the armed forces, are governed by legal provisions that make the right to leave the service dependent upon authorisation. In certain cases a link is established between the duration of training received and that of the services normally required before resignation is accepted. Since such restrictions may have a bearing on the application of the Conventions concerning forced or compulsory labour, the Committee again asks the Government to provide information on national law and practice concerning the situation of the various classes of persons in the service of the State, particularly in respect of freedom to leave the service on their own initiative within a reasonable period, either at specified intervals or with previous notice.

TEXT

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