Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

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:

Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention. Work exacted from an individual as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law. 1. The Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention for many years to the need to amend section 1 of Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968 regulating the terms of labour for persons detained in correctional institutions, under which “labour is compulsory for all detainees in detention and reform centres”. It considers that under this provision remand prisoners might also be subject to compulsory work, which is contrary to the Convention. The Government has repeatedly indicated that, in practice, remand prisoners are not required to perform any kind of labour, and it has declared its intention to amend this Order.

The Committee notes that the Government once again indicates in its latest report that the General Directorate of Labour has contacted the Ministry of Justice and the judicial authorities to examine ways to proceed rapidly to the repeal and replacement of the provisions of Order No. 68-353 which are contrary to the Convention. The review undertaken could result in the submission of a bill in the National Assembly at its session in October 2009. The Committee trusts that the Government will not fail to take all the necessary measures to have the bill adopted and to ensure that the new legislation regulating prison labour will indicate explicitly that remand prisoners awaiting trial are not compelled to work in prison.

2. In response to its previous comments, the Committee notes that the Government indicates that the prison administration rarely makes use of the provisions of section 7(2) of Order No. 68-353, which authorize prisoners whose conduct is considered satisfactory to work for private employers, the tendency being rather to grant them parole. The Committee recalls that according to Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention, prisoners may not be hired to, or placed at, the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations. It has nevertheless considered that, provided safeguards exist to ensure that prisoners accept such work voluntarily and that the conditions of such work approximate those of a free labour relationship, the private employment of prisoners may be compatible with the Convention. Under these conditions, the Committee asks the Government to specify the procedure followed when convicted persons work for private employers, the manner in which their consent to such work is provided for, and the conditions of employment that are guaranteed to them. Please provide information on the remuneration paid to convicted persons vis-à-vis the average remuneration paid for the same activity performed by the free workers.

 

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

Article 2, paragraph 2, subparagraph (c), of the Convention. Work exacted from an individual as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law. 1. The Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention for many years to the need to amend section 1 of Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968 regulating the terms of labour for persons detained in correctional institutions, under which “labour is compulsory for all detainees in detention and reform centres”. It considers that under this provision remand prisoners might also be subject to compulsory work, which is contrary to the Convention. The Government has repeatedly indicated that, in practice, remand prisoners are not required to perform any kind of labour, and it has declared its intention to amend this Order.

The Committee notes that the Government once again indicates in its latest report that the General Directorate of Labour has contacted the Ministry of Justice and the judicial authorities to examine ways to proceed rapidly to the repeal and replacement of the provisions of Order No. 68-353 which are contrary to the Convention. The review undertaken could result in the submission of a bill in the National Assembly at its session in October 2009. The Committee trusts that the Government will not fail to take all the necessary measures to have the bill adopted and to ensure that the new legislation regulating prison labour will indicate explicitly that remand prisoners awaiting trial are not compelled to work in prison.

2. In response to its previous comments, the Committee notes that the Government indicates that the prison administration rarely makes use of the provisions of section 7(2) of Order No. 68-353, which authorize prisoners whose conduct is considered satisfactory to work for private employers, the tendency being rather to grant them parole. The Committee recalls that according to Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention, prisoners may not be hired to, or placed at, the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations. It has nevertheless considered that, provided safeguards exist to ensure that prisoners accept such work voluntarily and that the conditions of such work approximate those of a free labour relationship, the private employment of prisoners may be compatible with the Convention. Under these conditions, the Committee asks the Government to specify the procedure followed when convicted persons work for private employers, the manner in which their consent to such work is provided for, and the conditions of employment that are guaranteed to them. Please provide information on the remuneration paid to convicted persons vis-à-vis the average remuneration paid for the same activity performed by the free workers.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

Article 2, paragraph 2(c), of the Convention. Work exacted from an individual as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law. 1. The Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention for many years to the need to amend section 1 of Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968 regulating the terms of labour for persons detained in correctional institutions, under which labour may be compulsory for remand prisoners. It has also noted that the Government has repeatedly declared its intention to repeal this Order. In its last report, the Government states that section 1 of Order No. 68-353 has been misinterpreted and that there is no need to amend it, as it does not impose any obligation to work on remand prisoners.

The Committee notes these explanations. It notes that section 1 of the abovementioned Order states that labour is compulsory for all detainees in correctional institutions. The Committee previously considered that it was not clear from these provisions that remand prisoners were exempt from this obligation. The Government also indicated that no other text stated explicitly that remand prisoners awaiting trial were exempt from compulsory labour. The Committee also noted that the Government indicated regularly that, in practice, remand prisoners are not required to perform any kind of labour.

The Committee notes that, in the context of the information supplied in its report on the application of the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105), the Government still refers to the repeal of Order No. 68-353. The Committee therefore hopes that the new legislation regulating prison labour will indicate explicitly that remand prisoners awaiting trial are not compelled to work in prison. This will not only enable any legal ambiguity to be avoided but also allow the legislation to be aligned to established practice, in accordance with the Government’s repeated statements.

2. The Committee requests the Government to clarify whether, in practice, the prison administration makes use of the provisions of section 7(2) of Order No. 68-353, which authorize prisoners whose conduct is considered satisfactory to work for private employers.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation on the following matters.

Article 1(1) and Article 2(1) and (2)(c), of the Convention. In the comments it has been making for many years, the Committee has drawn the Government’s attention to section 1 of Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968, under which labour is compulsory for persons in detention. In its reports received in November 2003 and March 2004, the Government indicates yet again that the Order has not been repealed but that in practice remand prisoners are not required to perform any kind of labour, either in or outside correctional institutions. The Government again states its intention of repealing Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968 and indicates that a bill to repeal it will be submitted to the Central Council for Labour and Employment (CSTE) at its next meeting. As to the observation by the Union of Comoros Workers’ Autonomous Trade Unions (USATC), sent by the Government with its previous report, that judicial and prison authorities have had recourse to forced labour for remand prisoners and political detainees, the Committee notes that the Government once again condemns the fact that detained workers have been forced to perform urban cleaning work and confirms that the necessary steps have been taken to prevent recurrence of such abuse.

The Committee takes note of this information and again expresses the hope that the Government will very soon be in a position to indicate that Order No. 68‑353 of 6 April 1968 has been repealed or amended to ensure that persons detained without having been convicted shall work only on a voluntary basis and at their request.

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

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

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(1) and Article 2(1) and (2)(c), of the Convention. In the comments it has been making for many years, the Committee has drawn the Government’s attention to section 1 of Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968, under which labour is compulsory for persons in detention. In its reports received in November 2003 and March 2004, the Government indicates yet again that the Order has not been repealed but that in practice remand prisoners are not required to perform any kind of labour, either in or outside correctional institutions. The Government again states its intention of repealing Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968 and indicates that a bill to repeal it will be submitted to the Central Council for Labour and Employment (CSTE) at its next meeting. As to the observation by the Union of Comoros Workers’ Autonomous Trade Unions (USATC), sent by the Government with its previous report, that judicial and prison authorities have had recourse to forced labour for remand prisoners and political detainees, the Committee notes that the Government once again condemns the fact that detained workers have been forced to perform urban cleaning work and confirms that the necessary steps have been taken to prevent recurrence of such abuse.

The Committee takes note of this information and again expresses the hope that the Government will very soon be in a position to indicate that Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968 has been repealed or amended to ensure that persons detained without having been convicted shall work only on a voluntary basis and at their request.

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

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

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

Article 1(1) and Article 2(1) and (2)(c), of the Convention. In the comments it has been making for many years, the Committee has drawn the Government’s attention to section 1 of Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968, under which labour is compulsory for persons in detention. In its reports received in November 2003 and March 2004, the Government indicates yet again that the Order has not been repealed but that in practice remand prisoners are not required to perform any kind of labour, either in or outside correctional institutions. The Government again states its intention of repealing Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968 and indicates that a bill to repeal it will be submitted to the Central Council for Labour and Employment (CSTE) at its next meeting. As to the observation by the Union of Comoros Workers’ Autonomous Trade Unions (USATC), sent by the Government with its previous report, that judicial and prison authorities have had recourse to forced labour for remand prisoners and political detainees, the Committee notes that the Government once again condemns the fact that detained workers have been forced to perform urban cleaning work and confirms that the necessary steps have been taken to prevent recurrence of such abuse.

The Committee takes note of this information and again expresses the hope that the Government will very soon be in a position to indicate that Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968 has been repealed or amended to ensure that persons detained without having been convicted shall work only on a voluntary basis and at their request.

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:

1. Article 1, paragraph 1, and Article 2, paragraphs 1 and 2(c), of the Convention. In its comments over a number of years, the Committee has drawn the Government’s attention to section 1 of Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968, under which labour is compulsory for all persons in detention. In its report the Government indicated that this Order had not been abrogated but that in practice prisoners were not under the obligation to perform any kind of labour, either inside correctional institutions or on the outside. The Committee notes the comments made by the Union of Comoros Workers’ Autonomous Trade Unions (USATC), transmitted by the Government in its report, according to which judicial and prison authorities had recourse to forced labour for detainees and political detainees. The USATC indicated in 1999 that "certain workers of the Ports and Maritime Transport Company (SOCOPOTRAM) who had claimed their rights found themselves in jails of the national police and were forced to work by cleaning the area of the port". The Committee notes that in its response to the comments of the USATC, the Government condemned the fact that detained workers were forced to perform urban cleaning work. The Committee hopes that the Government will take the measures necessary to ensure that persons detained without having been convicted shall work only on a voluntary basis and at their request.

2. In its earlier comments the Committee also referred to section 7, paragraph 2, of Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968, according to which prisoners whose conduct is considered satisfactory can work for a private employer with a view to their moral rehabilitation or re-adaptation to normal working life. It requested the Government to provide information on the practice of private individuals or companies using prison labour. In its report the Government indicated that it envisaged the abrogation of the Order in question. The Committee hopes that the Government will soon be able to announce the abrogation of Order No. 68-353 and that it will transmit a copy of the abrogating text.

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

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

1.  Article 1, paragraph 1, and Article 2, paragraphs 1 and 2(c), of the Convention.  In its comments over a number of years, the Committee has drawn the Government’s attention to section 1 of Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968, under which labour is compulsory for all persons in detention. In its report the Government indicated that this Order had not been abrogated but that in practice prisoners were not under the obligation to perform any kind of labour, either inside correctional institutions or on the outside. The Committee notes the comments made by the Union of Comoros Workers’ Autonomous Trade Unions (USATC), transmitted by the Government in its report, according to which judicial and prison authorities had recourse to forced labour for detainees, political detainees and prisoners. The USATC indicated in 1999 that "certain workers of the Ports and Maritime Transport Company (SOCOPOTRAM) who had claimed their rights found themselves in jails of the national police and were forced to work by cleaning the area of the port". The Committee notes that in its response to the comments of the USATC, the Government condemned the fact that detained workers were forced to perform urban cleaning work. The Committee hopes that the Government will take the measures necessary to ensure that persons detained without having been convicted shall work only on a voluntary basis and at their request.

2.  In its earlier comments the Committee also referred to section 7, paragraph 2, of Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968, according to which prisoners whose conduct is considered satisfactory can work for a private employer with a view to their moral rehabilitation or re-adaptation to normal working life. It requested the Government to provide information on the practice of private individuals or companies using prison labour. In its report the Government indicated that it envisaged the abrogation of the Order in question. The Committee hopes that the Government will soon be able to announce the abrogation of Order No. 68-353 and that it will transmit a copy of the abrogating text.

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

Referring to the general observation on the Convention made in its report to the 87th Session of the International Labour Conference (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 any 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 it is free from the menace of any penalty, including any loss of privileges or other disadvantages following from a refusal to work.

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

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. In its comments over a number of years, the Committee has drawn the Government's attention to section 1 of Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968, under which labour is compulsory for all persons in detention. It noted the Government's statements according to which, in practice, persons in detention are not compelled to work and requested the Government to amend the provision in question to ensure that legislation reflects actual practice. In its last report received in 1997, the Government indicated that during recent years, the prison administration had been adversely affected by frequent changes at ministerial level, but that the management of detention centres was being transferred back to the Ministry of Justice, which would facilitate the implementation of an improved prison policy. The Committee therefore trusts that the Government will do everything possible in the near future to ensure through legislation that prisoners are not compelled to work except as a consequence of a conviction in a court and only under conditions stipulated by the Convention; and that prisoners and persons held in detention who have not been tried are not compelled to work and may work only on a purely voluntary basis and at their request. 2. In its earlier comments, the Committee also referred to section 7, paragraph 2 of the Order in question, according to which prisoners whose conduct is considered satisfactory can work for a private employer with a view to their moral rehabilitation and readaptation to normal working life. It requested the Government to provide information on the practice of private individuals or companies using prison labour. The Government stated that punishment involving the deprivation of liberty of prisoners in agricultural institutions could help to eliminate idleness, reduce the temptation to escape, and provide a regular diet and income, part of which would be used to pay compensation. The Committee requests further information about the arrangements for prisoners working in agricultural institutions including their supervision, income and payment of compensation. The Committee noted that a survey was under way on the role of the prison in the country's penal system and that alternative punishments such as community service were to be incorporated in the Penal Code. The Committee hopes that the revision of prison legislation will be completed in the near future, that it will take account of the provisions of the Convention concerning in particular the conditions for the use of prison labour, as explained in paragraphs 97-101 of the General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour and also explained in paragraphs 116-125 of the 1998 General Report, and that copies of any new texts will be provided.

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

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

Article 1, paragraph 1, and Article 2, paragraphs 1 and 2(c), of the Convention. 1. In its comments over a number of years, the Committee has drawn the Government's attention to section 1 of Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968, under which labour is compulsory for all persons in detention. It noted the Government's statements according to which, in practice, persons in detention are not compelled to work and requested the Government to amend the provision in question to ensure that legislation reflects actual practice. In its last report received in 1997, the Government indicated that during recent years, the prison administration had been adversely affected by frequent changes at ministerial level, but that the management of detention centres was being transferred back to the Ministry of Justice, which would facilitate the implementation of an improved prison policy. The Committee therefore trusts that the Government will do everything possible in the near future to ensure through legislation that prisoners are not compelled to work except as a consequence of a conviction in a court and only under conditions stipulated by the Convention; and that prisoners and persons held in detention who have not been tried are not compelled to work and may work only on a purely voluntary basis and at their request.

2. In its earlier comments, the Committee also referred to section 7, paragraph 2 of the Order in question, according to which prisoners whose conduct is considered satisfactory can work for a private employer with a view to their moral rehabilitation and readaptation to normal working life. It requested the Government to provide information on the practice of private individuals or companies using prison labour. The Government states that punishment involving the deprivation of liberty of prisoners in agricultural institutions could help to eliminate idleness, reduce the temptation to escape, and provide a regular diet and income, part of which would be used to pay compensation. The Committee requests further information about the arrangements for prisoners working in agricultural institutions including their supervision, income and payment of compensation.

The Committee notes that a survey is under way on the role of the prison in the country's penal system and that alternative punishments such as community service are to be incorporated in the Penal Code. The Committee hopes that the revision of prison legislation that is currently under way will be completed in the near future, that it will take account of the provisions of the Convention concerning in particular the conditions for the use of prison labour, as explained in paragraphs 97-101 of the General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour and also explained in paragraphs 116-125 of the 1998 General Report, and that copies of any new texts will be provided.

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

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:

1. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to section 1 of Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968, under which labour is compulsory for all those detained in detention and disciplinary centres.

The Committee noted that, according to the Government, there are no instruments which provide for exemption from compulsory prison labour for detained persons awaiting trial but that, in practice, work is not required from them.

Referring to paragraph 90 of its 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour, the Committee recalled that, under the terms of the Convention, work can only be exacted from a prisoner as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law; prisoners awaiting trial or persons detained without trial may, at their own request, perform work on a purely voluntary basis.

Since section 1 of Order 68-353 as it now stands provides for compulsory labour for detained persons, which is contrary to the Convention, and since, according to the Government, work is not exacted from detained persons in practice, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated to amend section 1 of Order No. 68-353 so that the legislation reflects the practice reported by the Government.

2. The Committee noted previously that section 7 of Order No. 68/353 of 6 April 1968 provides in its first subsection that the hiring out of prison labour, composed of convicted prisoners, to private individuals or enterprises for work outside the prison establishment is expressly prohibited and, in its second subsection, that prisoners whose behaviour is regarded as satisfactory are authorized to work for private employers with a view to their moral rehabilitation and readaptation to normal working life.

The Committee referred to paragraphs 97 to 101 of its 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour, concerning the conditions governing the use of prison labour, and asked the Government to provide information on the practice of the use of prison labour by private individuals or enterprises.

The Committee noted the Government's indications that, since 1978, there has been no hiring out of prison labour to private individuals or associations and that all the legal texts concerning the work of detainees were being reviewed, which would enable the requirements of the Convention to be taken into account.

The Committee also noted from the information contained in the Government's report on the application of Convention No. 105 that it had not been possible to complete the project to review Order No. 68-353, but that the Government would take account of the Committee's comments during this review.

The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the state of progress of the above review and any texts that had been adopted.

The Committee noted that, according to the Government's report received in April 1994, the political instability of the Federal Assembly was at the origins of the delay in finalizing the projects to review old texts. It also noted that the Government once again stated that it intended to amend Order No. 68-353.

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

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

1. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to section 1 of Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968, under which labour is compulsory for all those detained in detention and disciplinary centres.

The Committee noted that, according to the Government, there are no instruments which provide for exemption from compulsory prison labour for detained persons awaiting trial but that, in practice, work is not required from them.

Referring to paragraph 90 of its 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour, the Committee recalled that, under the terms of the Convention, work can only be exacted from a prisoner as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law; prisoners awaiting trial or persons detained without trial may, at their own request, perform work on a purely voluntary basis.

Since section 1 of Order 68-353 as it now stands provides for compulsory labour for detained persons, which is contrary to the Convention, and since, according to the Government, work is not exacted from detained persons in practice, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated to amend section 1 of Order No. 68-353 so that the legislation reflects the practice reported by the Government.

2. The Committee noted previously that section 7 of Order No. 68/353 of 6 April 1968 provides in its first subsection that the hiring out of prison labour, composed of convicted prisoners, to private individuals or enterprises for work outside the prison establishment is expressly prohibited and, in its second subsection, that prisoners whose behaviour is regarded as satisfactory are authorized to work for private employers with a view to their moral rehabilitation and readaptation to normal working life.

The Committee referred to paragraphs 97 to 101 of its 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour, concerning the conditions governing the use of prison labour, and asked the Government to provide information on the practice of the use of prison labour by private individuals or enterprises.

The Committee noted the Government's indications that, since 1978, there has been no hiring out of prison labour to private individuals or associations and that all the legal texts concerning the work of detainees were being reviewed, which would enable the requirements of the Convention to be taken into account.

The Committee also noted from the information contained in the Government's report on the application of Convention No. 105 that it had not been possible to complete the project to review Order No. 68-353, but that the Government would take account of the Committee's comments during this review.

The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the state of progress of the above review and any texts that had been adopted.

The Committee notes that, according to the Government's report, the political instability of the Federal Assembly is at the origins of the delay in finalizing the projects to review old texts. It also notes that the Government once again states that it intends to amend Order No. 68-353.

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

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

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 earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 1 of Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968, under which labour is compulsory for all those detained in detention and disciplinary centres.

The Committee noted that, in its report, the Government indicates that there are no instruments which provide for exemption from compulsory prison labour for detained persons awaiting trial but that, in practice, work cannot be exacted from them.

The Committee refers to paragraph 90 of its General Survey of 1979 on the Abolition of Forced Labour and recalls that, in the terms of the Convention, work can only be exacted from a prisoner as a consequence of a conviction; prisoners awaiting trial or persons detained without trial may, at their own request, perform work on a purely voluntary basis.

Since section 1 of Order No. 68-353 as it now stands provides for compulsory labour for detained persons, which is contrary to the Convention, and since, according to the Government, work is not exacted from detained persons in practice, the Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated to amend section 1 of Order No. 68-353 so that the legislation reflects the practice reported by the Government.

2. The Committee noted previously that section 7 of Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968 provides in its first subsection that the hiring out of prison labour, composed of convicted prisoners, to private individuals or enterprises for work outside the prison establishment shall be expressly prohibited and, in its second subsection, that prisoners whose behaviour is regarded as satisfactory shall be authorized to work for private employers with a view to their moral rehabilitation and readaptation to normal working life.

The Committee referred to paragraphs 97 to 101 of its General Survey of 1979 on the Abolition of Forced Labour, which concern the conditions governing the use of prison labour, and asked the Government to provide information on the practice of the use of prison labour by private individuals or associations.

The Committee noted the Government's indications that, since 1978, there has been no hiring out of prison labour to private individuals or associations and that all the legal texts concerning the work of detainees were being reviewed, which would enable the requirements of the Convention to be taken into account.

The Committee noted from the Governments indications in its report on the application of Convention No. 105 that it has not been possible to complete the project to review Order No. 68-353, but that the Government will take account of the Committee's comments during this review.

The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the state of progress of the above review and any texts that have been adopted.

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

1. In earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 1 of Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968, under which labour is compulsory for all those detained in detention and disciplinary centres.

The Committee notes that, in its report, the Government indicates that there are no instruments which provide for exemption from compulsory prison labour for detained persons awaiting trial but that, in practice, work cannot be exacted from them.

The Committee refers to paragraph 90 of its General Survey of 1979 on the Abolition of Forced Labour and recalls that, in the terms of the Convention, work can only be exacted from a prisoner as a consequence of a conviction; prisoners awaiting trial or persons detained without trial may, at their own request, perform work on a purely voluntary basis.

Since section 1 of Order No. 68-353 as it now stands provides for compulsory labour for detained persons, which is contrary to the Convention, and since, according to the Government, work is not exacted from detained persons in practice, the Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated to amend section 1 of Order No. 68-353 so that the legislation reflects the practice reported by the Government.

2. The Committee noted previously that section 7 of Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968 provides in its first subsection that the hiring out of prison labour, composed of convicted prisoners, to private individuals or enterprises for work outside the prison establishment shall be expressly prohibited and, in its second subsection, that prisoners whose behaviour is regarded as satisfactory shall be authorized to work for private employers with a view to their moral rehabilitation and readaptation to normal working life.

The Committee referred to paragraphs 97 to 101 of its General Survey of 1979 on the Abolition of Forced Labour, which concern the conditions governing the use of prison labour, and asked the Government to provide information on the practice of the use of prison labour by private individuals or associations.

The Committee noted the Government's indications that, since 1978, there has been no hiring out of prison labour to private individuals or associations and that all the legal texts concerning the work of detainees were being reviewed, which would enable the requirements of the Convention to be taken into account.

The Committee notes from the Governments indications in its report on the application of Convention No. 105 that it has not been possible to complete the project to review Order No. 68-353, but that the Government will take account of the Committee's comments during this review.

The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the state of progress of the above review and any texts that have been adopted.

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

1. In earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 1 of Order No. 68-353 of 6 April 1968 under which labour is compulsory for all those detained in detention and disciplinary centres.

The Committee notes that the text of Order No. 68-353 does not make it clear that, in accordance with the Convention, work may be exacted from persons in detention only as a consequence of a conviction.

The Committee asks the Government to indicate whether other legal texts provide for exemption from compulsory prison labour for detainees who have not been convicted, such as prisoners awaiting trial or persons detained without trial. If not, the Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated to ensure that work cannot be exacted from such persons.

2. The Committee noted previously that section 7 of Order No. 68-353, of 6 April 1968, provides in its first subsection that the hiring out of prison labour, composed of convicted prisoners, to private individuals or enterprises, for work outside the prison establishment shall be expressly prohibited and, in its second subsection, that prisoners whose behaviour is regarded as satisfactory shall be authorised to work for private employers with a view to their moral rehabilitation and readaptation to normal working life.

Referring to paragraphs 97 to 101 of its General Survey of 1979 on the Abolition of Forced Labour, which concern the conditions governing the use of prison labour, the Committee asked the Government to provide information on the practice of the use of prison labour by individuals or associations.

The Committee notes the Government's indications that, since 1978, there has been no hiring out of prison labour to private individuals or associations, and that such labour is used only inside penitentiary establishments or outside the latter by the prison administration in work which is in the public interest.

The Committee also notes that all the legal texts concerning the work of detainees are currently being reviewed, which will enable the requirements of the Convention to be taken into account.

The Committee asks the Government to report on the progress of the above review and to provide copies of the texts concerning the labour of detainees as soon as they are adopted.