Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1990, Publication: 77th ILC session (1990)

The Government has communicated the following information:

In the detailed reports on ratified Conventions, and during the sessions of the International Labour Conference, Government delegates have always indicated that draft texts have been drawn up to bring the national law and practice into conformity with certain Conventions, namely Nos.: 18 - Workmen's Compensation (Occupational Diseases), 1925; 19 - Equality of Treatment (Accident Compensation), 1925; 29 - Forced Labour, 1930; 41 - Night Work (Women) (Revised), 1934; 52 - Holidays with Pay, 1936; 62 - Safety Provisions (Building), 1937; 87 - Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise, 1948; 105 - Abolition of Forced Labour, 1957; 118 - Equality of Treatment (Social Security), 1962. The constitutional procedure for the adoption of these draft texts is underway and is continuing before the competent national authorities. It points out that the delay in adopting these drafts was mainly due to the fact that parliamentary sessions take place twice each year (in March and October) and the draft legislation which has been debated there very often involved economic problems, given the recent creation of this institution. However, measures have been taken by the Department of Labour to encourage the competent authorities to accelerate the adoption of these texts. The Office will be kept informed of the measures taken in this regard in due time. In the meantime, the Government refers to its reports made on these instruments.

In addition, a Government representative indicated that there had been a recent change in the administration and a new Minister of Labour had only recently been appointed. He noted that the necessary legislation had been elaborated and submitted to the competent authorities but that he was not sure what was delaying its adoption. The new Minister of Labour wished to assure this Committee that he would do everything in his power to ensure that these texts were adopted.

The Workers' members wished to draw the Government's attention to the importance this Committee attached to this Convention and to the fact that the Committee of Experts had been making comments on this Convention virtually every year since 1966. It was clear that this Convention was not being applied in the Central African Republic. In the first place, several provisions existed which involved forced labour for certain categories of citizens. For some time now the Government had indicated that draft legislation to repeal these provisions had been drawn up and submitted to the competent authorities. Secondly, there was the issue of compulsory cultivation imposed on local communities. The Convention, however, only authorised recourse to compulsory cultivation for the prevention of famine. They expressed their deep concern at the situation and hoped that the Government would be in a position to indicate next year that the legislation in question had indeed been repealed.

The Employers' members noted that this problem needed urgent attention by the Government as it had been discussed in this Committee since 1966. The first issue of concern was the legislation which provided for forced labour. In the past, the Government had indicated that this legislation would be repealed, but now the Committee of Experts' report indicated that a tripartite committee had been established to assess the effects of repealing these texts at the social and economic level. This appeared to be a step backwards as the Government had indicated that this legislation was no longer applied. The second issue concerned compulsory cultivation. The Government should specify the actual limits of the legislation concerning compulsory cultivation so that it would remain within the permissible scope of the Convention. Given that this question had been discussed for a number of years and that no information had been received, new legislation should be introduced as soon as possible. If no progress could be indicated next year, the present Committee should adopt stricter measures.

The Government representative clarified that the text adopted under the former regime had fallen into abeyance and was no longer applicable. The comments made by the Committee of Experts had indicated that the Government should formally repeal these texts and it was in the process of doing this.

The Committee noted the information given by the Government according to which the new Minister of Labour had only been in office for a few days. Although such a change in government could be a cause of delay in complying with provisions of a Convention, it regretted that the Government had not been in a position to ensure compliance over the last period. It, therefore, urged the Government to amend the legislation as indicated by the Committee of Experts and felt the need to state that, if the Government did not comply with this request, the Committee might treat the case next year in a different way.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1989, Publication: 76th ILC session (1989)

The government has communicated the following information:

As regards previous comments made by the Committee of Experts concerning this Convention as well as Conventions Nos. 105 and 119, the Government indicates that draft texts have been elaborated so as to bring law and national practice into conformity with these Conventions. The constitutional procedure for adoption of these texts is in process and they will go before the competent authorities. Furthermore, it is advisable to refer to the previous declarations made by the delegation in response to the Committee of Experts' comments concerning the divergences between the international Conventions and the legislative provisions and national practice in the Central African Republic.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1988, Publication: 75th ILC session (1988)

See under Convention No. 105, as follows:

The Government has communicated the following information:

The responses to observations concerning Conventions Nos. 29 and 105 which were provided in earlier reports remain valid to the extent that, within the context of significant institutional changes within the country, the draft texts have been taken up anew and submitted to the competent authorities. The draft texts are following the procedures used by national authorities for adoption of legislation.

The Government will provide new information concerning development of the situation in due time.

In addition a Government representative acknowledged that the Committee of Experts' observations on Conventions Nos. 29 and 105 addressed analogous subjects, but they did not necessarily overlap. In relation to Convention No. 105 the Committee had referred to legislative texts on intellectual freedom dating from 1960, 1963 and 1969. Moreover, the 1986 Constitution guaranteed fundamental freedoms to individuals and to groups, albeit within the framework of laws and regulations. In reply to the Committee of Experts' request for a copy of texts relating to the dissolution of the "MESAN" national movement, the Government representative noted that this movement had been a party and then a state organ under the regime of the former Emperor. The movement had been automatically dissolved upon the fall of the Emperor's regime and the abrogation of its Constitution. Since two different problems were involved, the Government did not believe that the conclusions under Convention No. 105 could be identical to those reached under Convention No. 29.

The Workers' and Employers' members expressed the wish that the conclusions of the present Committee concerning Convention No. 29 apply also to this Convention.

In addition a Government representative stated that his country was aware of the necessity to bring its law and practice in conformity with the provisions of ratified Conventions. That was why the Government had never hesitated to give the requested information so that the efforts that were being made were recognised. He recalled that the ordinances which were the subject of the observations by the Committee of Experts had been adopted at a time when executive and legal powers were totally concentrated in the hands of the Emperor. During this period ordinances were adopted by force of law. These texts had since become null and void and were no longer applied. Although they were not yet abrogated formally his Government was attending to this. The 1960 law concerning rural development had never introduced forced labour. It was simply a means by which the Government assured a technical support structure to cultivators in order to supply them with the basic services which would help them increase their production.

The Workers' members, while understanding the difficulties that the country had gone through, its instabilities and the necessary restructuring, noted however that for many years the Committee of Experts had not received any information on the application of this basic Convention, or any indication that these former provisions, which permitted direct or indirect forced labour, had been abrogated or replaced. In regard to the observations concerning the law on the development of the rural economy, the Government indicated that it was a matter of assuring technical support to agricultural workers. In the field of agriculture, it should be noted that compulsory cultivation had been imposed on the local community. The Workers' members would like, therefore. to have clarification as quickly as possible in regard to those questions which had been dealt with in the Committee for some time. The Government should supply information which would indicate whether the present Convention was being applied fully. ILO assistance might be able to clarify this situation.

The Employers' members stated that the application of this Convention had been discussed since 1966, and it was apparent that a whole series of laws did not conform to the Convention. Two categories of provisions were concerned: legislation concerning the elimination of idleness, and provisions concerning minimum surfaces for cultivation. For several years the Government had indicated that provisions would be adopted and the Committee of Experts had referred to these possible provisions since 1966. The report of the Committee of Experts had not mentioned any changes since 1966 and this should be noted in the report of the present Committee.

The Government representative stated that his Government had always hoped that the ILO would be able to give aid in regard to the draft texts concerning the issues raised and indeed this assistance had taken place. In order that the Committee would be better able to understand the situation, he explained the legislative procedure which had been introduced by the new Constitution. The National Assembly, which was elected in July 1987, had adopted certain urgent texts, in particular the investment code, the law on small and medium-sized enterprises, and the law on freedom of association and the protection of trade union rights. The Government was ready to accept the assistance of ILO in all matters. In regard to idleness, a draft text had been sent to the National Assembly and should be examined in the near future.

The Workers' members commented that the manner in which laws were drawn up and voted upon showed the responsibility of the authorities of the country. However, ILO assistance should be requested before the laws are adopted so that they are effective from the beginning and conform with ratified Conventions.

The Committee took note of the information provided by the Government representative as well as the written information which had been communicated by the Government. The Committee had examined this case on many occasions and had noted considerable divergencies between the Convention and the legislation and practice in the Central African Republic. The Committee noted with regret that considerable difficulties still remained. The Committee hoped that the Government would, in the near future, take all necessary measures, with the assistance of the ILO if appropriate, to comply fully with its obligations under Convention No. 105. The Committee hoped that the next report would show that real progress had been made.

In addition a Government representative stated that his country was aware of the necessity to bring its law and practice in conformity with the provisions of ratified Conventions. That was why the Government had never hesitated to give the requested information so that the efforts that were being made were recognised. He recalled that the ordinances which were the subject of the observations by the Committee of Experts had been adopted at a time when executive and legal powers were totally concentrated in the hands of the Emperor. During this period ordinances were adopted by force of law. These texts had since become null and void and were no longer applied. Although they were not yet abrogated formally his Government was attending to this. The 1960 law concerning rural development had never introduced forced labour. It was simply a means by which the Government assured a technical support structure to cultivators in order to supply them with the basic services which would help them increase their production.

The Workers' members, while understanding the difficulties that the country had gone through, its instabilities and the necessary restructuring, noted however that for many years the Committee of Experts had not received any information on the application of this basic Convention, or any indication that these former provisions, which permitted direct or indirect forced labour, had been abrogated or replaced. In regard to the observations concerning the law on the development of the rural economy, the Government indicated that it was a matter of assuring technical support to agricultural workers. In the field of agriculture, it should be noted that compulsory cultivation had been imposed on the local community. The Workers' members would like, therefore. to have clarification as quickly as possible in regard to those questions which had been dealt with in the Committee for some time. The Government should supply information which would indicate whether the present Convention was being applied fully. ILO assistance might be able to clarify this situation.

The Employers' members stated that the application of this Convention had been discussed since 1966, and it was apparent that a whole series of laws did not conform to the Convention. Two categories of provisions were concerned: legislation concerning the elimination of idleness, and provisions concerning minimum surfaces for cultivation. For several years the Government had indicated that provisions would be adopted and the Committee of Experts had referred to these possible provisions since 1966. The report of the Committee of Experts had not mentioned any changes since 1966 and this should be noted in the report of the present Committee.

The Government representative stated that his Government had always hoped that the ILO would be able to give aid in regard to the draft texts concerning the issues raised and indeed this assistance had taken place. In order that the Committee would be better able to understand the situation, he explained the legislative procedure which had been introduced by the new Constitution. The National Assembly, which was elected in July 1987, had adopted certain urgent texts, in particular the investment code, the law on small and medium-sized enterprises, and the law on freedom of association and the protection of trade union rights. The Government was ready to accept the assistance of ILO in all matters. In regard to idleness, a draft text had been sent to the National Assembly and should be examined in the near future.

The Workers' members commented that the manner in which laws were drawn up and voted upon showed the responsibility of the authorities of the country. However, ILO assistance should be requested before the laws are adopted so that they are effective from the beginning and conform with ratified Conventions.

The Committee took note of the information provided by the Government representative as well as the written information which had been communicated by the Government. The Committee had examined this case on many occasions and had noted considerable divergencies between the Convention and the legislation and practice in the Central African Republic. The Committee noted with regret that considerable difficulties still remained. The Committee hoped that the Government would in the near future take all necessary measures, with the assistance of the ILO if appropriate, to comply fully with its obligations under Convention No. 29. The Committee hoped that the next report would show that real progress had been made.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1987, Publication: 73rd ILC session (1987)

The Government has communicated the following information:

(a) The Government would draw the Committee's attention to the historical and Political context existing when the legislation in question was adopted in 1966 and 1972. The national legislative committee has already made some drafts and an ad hoc committee will deal with all the aspects of these problems before the drafts are submitted to the competent authorities. The Government is gradually setting up democratic institutions representing all sections of society whose representatives will participate in this committee.

(b) As regards the Committee of Experts' observations on section 28 of Act No. 60/109 respecting the development of the rural economy, the Government repeats that there are no legal or practical measures submitting agricultural workers to any forced or compulsory labour or imposing the cultivation of land on them. The Government's role as the main promoter of development consists in guaranteeing agricultural workers technical training and providing basic services to increase production and improve living standards. In the Government's view, freedom to work must not imply the freedom or the right to do nothing, especially in a developing country, where the Government plays the main role in economic and social development.

In addition, a Government representative referred to the information provided in writing concerning Conventions Nos. 29 and 105. With regard to Convention No. 29 the National Legislative Committee had already examined the draft amendments submitted to it and considered that the problems affected all social strata in the country. The opinion of the most qualified representatives in these matters deserved to be taken into account. Once democratic institutions had been established, the Government pledged to submit these matters for consideration in the manner requested by the ILO. It was brought to the Committee's attention that legislative elections, involving the election of deputies, would take place in July 1987.

With regard to the question concerning the practice of subjecting farmers to a form of forced labour, it should be noted that the Government had not taken any legal measure to make this compulsory. However, if it was the view of the ILO that such a practice was contrary to international labour standards, his Government would take note of this and the comments of the Committee of Experts would be taken into consideration once the matters within the competence of Parliament were submitted to it. The Government would certainly ask for the ILO's assistance when the moment came.

With regard to Convention No. 105 he stressed that the Constitution of 28 November 1986 had established a democratic regime. Its adoption made the texts adopted under the previous regime anachronistic. This was why his Government gave its guarantee that these texts were in the process of being repealed and that it was simply a question of letting the procedure follow its course. It was worth noting that since the adoption of the Constitution the Central African people now had a single party called the Central African Democratic Union ("Rassemblement democratique centrafrican (RDC")). In the programme of the party approved by the constituent Assembly of 6 February 1987, a predominant place had been given to social and cultural problems. In effect, the social protection of workers in general would be assured in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution. which aimed to protect their fundamental rights. In return, the party expected from them a patriotic attitude to work through the quality of their contributions and their discipline.

The Workers' members thanked the Government representative for his statement. His country had lived through troublesome and difficult years, and unfortunately all their consequences had not yet disappeared. With regard to Conventions Nos. 29 and 105, as stated in the reply given to the Committee of Experts and afterwards in the written reply, the legislative text and regulations were in the process not only of being prepared but also of being adopted. There were still ordinances at variance with the Conventions. There were reasons to be concerned, in particular by the question of the rural workers who were often very much affected by forced labour. There were two questions to be asked concerning the texts which had been communicated in writing and in the replies given by the Government concerning Convention No. 29. Among other things it was said that "the Government's role as the main promoter of development consists in guaranteeing agricultural workers technical training...". If this was technical training then all well and good. But if it was a question of supervisors or chiefs who were the masters and could do whatever they wanted with rural workers, then this was a violation of the Convention. In this regard they pointed to a subsequent sentence - for which a brief word of explanation was also necessary - which stated that "In the Government's view, freedom to work must not imply the freedom or the right to do nothing". Work had to be encouraged, along with the development of the country, but it was necessary to examine how this so-called freedom or right to do nothing was penalised. There were some questions concerning the correct application of Conventions Nos. 29 and 105. It had been said that new draft laws which would help to bring legislation into conformity with them were submitted to the Council of Ministers. In view of the fact that there would soon be elections, it could be hoped that real solutions to these problems could be attained the following year. With regard to the direct contacts mission it was not clear whether they were for these Conventions, or whether they were for Convention No. 87 only. A clarification on this point would be useful for this Committee.

The Government representative reaffirmed that the Central African Republic guaranteed fundamental freedoms and that it was out of the question that his Government should violate international Conventions that it had freely ratified. Concerning direct contacts, the principle of contacts had been accepted by the Government and it was a question of specifying the date. Because of the steps involved in adopting the Constitution, and also because of the presidential election that had taken place, the date had been postponed. The Government would communicate the exact date before the end of the Conference.

The Employers' members recalled that the questions at issue had been dealt with a number of times by the Committee and there was still a whole series of laws which were not in conformity with the provisions of the Conventions and to which reference had been made for more than 20 years: these included legislation punishing idleness and provisions for the compulsory cultivation of land. These provisions must be amended in order to comply full with ILO standards. The Government has held for years now that such changes are going to be introduced and it has thus recognised the need for bringing the laws into line with the Conventions. There was a similar situation with other laws related to the political movement MESAN, and various other provisions contrary to Convention No. 105. Since the beginning of the 1980s it had been stated that various draft laws which were being discussed would remedy the situation. It must therefore be stated even more urgently than previously that some action must be taken. The Government representative had once again been asked specifically whether the direct contacts mission was to cover the regularisation of the situation regarding Conventions Nos. 29 and 105. Finally, the information communicated in writing could not be evaluated definitively, but the Employers' members agreed with the statement by the Workers' members that the last sentence in connection with Convention No. 29 left open all kinds of possibilities; they would therefore appreciate more concrete indications from the Government as to how it would deal with the situation, which had existed for many years.

Another Government representative stated that, while the concerns of the past two speakers were perfectly understandable, it was important to place these problems in their proper context. For 14 years his country had been on the border of civil war. For years workers and trade unionists had been imprisoned and it was prohibited to train inspectors of labour and social laws. Since the fall of the previous regime his country had also lived through a troubled period. It was only since 1981 that the internal political situation, peace and security had been consolidated. They were now getting the democratic process under way. Democratic elections would take place the following month. The legislative body thus established would have the responsibility for preparing legislative texts and regulations in order to regularise political and administrative life. With Parliament established, all the texts under consideration would be revised.

Responding more specifically to the question raised by the Employers' members, it went without saying that when the direct contacts mission took place at the date to be agreed before the end of the Conference, they would be at the disposal of the mission so that it could verify everything it wished. Thus there was no bad faith on the part of the Central African Government. On the contrary, it was fully aware of the need to respect standards, but these had been trampled on for 22 years. For 22 years the Central African Republic had had no Parliament and had lived under a dictatorial regime that had violated the fundamental rights of workers. It was in this context that one must understand their current situation, but there was no problem with regard to the direct contacts mission.

Secondly, with regard to the concerns expressed by the Workers' members, technical training was indeed technical training in rural areas. In these rural areas, agricultural cultivation constituted the sole source of income for workers. The aim of this training was thus to improve their productivity. It was not a matter of military organisation obliging people to work one plot of land rather than another, but was purely technical training. The objective was simply to use persuasion, to encourage all youths of working age either to go back to the land, or to pursue vocational training in order to find work wherever they could in urban centres. This was a question of providing incentives through persuasion. It should not give the impression that there was any repression against people without work. His country was one of the least advanced and there was not enough work. If one had to repress people without work. then over half the population would have to be repressed. There were many problems to be solved and the aim was to solve them with the aid of the ILO. The Government would inform the ILO at each stage of the solution of problems.

The Committee noted the information and additional explanations provided by the Government representatives. The Committee, however, noted with regret that no progress had been made since it last discussed the case in 1985. It hoped that the Government would take the necessary measures in the very near future to bring national legislation and practice into conformity with the Conventions. The Committee noted that a Government representative had asked for a direct contacts mission in order to be able to solve some of these problems. It hoped that, as promised, the dates on which the mission should take place would be indicated before the end of the Conference. The Committee hoped that progress would be reported next year.

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

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

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

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

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

Observation (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:

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. 1. Freedom of military service personnel to leave the service of the State. In reply to the comments of the Committee, the Government indicates that military service personnel, having attained 15 years of service, may request a leave of absence for personal reasons. The Committee reminds the Government that legal or statutory provisions which prohibit a worker employed for an indefinite duration, or for a very long period, to terminate his or her employment by means of notice of reasonable length have the effect of transforming a contractual relationship based on the free will of the parties into service by compulsion of law, and are consequently incompatible with the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to please indicate how, in practice, the right of career military service personnel to leave the service in peacetime before 15 years has elapsed is guaranteed, specifying the procedure that must be followed and, if necessary, the sanctions incurred by those personnel who leave the service prior to the end of that period. Please supply copies of relevant statutory provisions.

2. Trafficking in persons. Referring to its previous comments, the Committee regrets that the Government has provided no information on measures taken with a view to preventing, suppressing and punishing the trafficking in persons for purposes of exploitation. The Government indicates only that the Penal Code in the course of adoption provides for sanctions for trafficking in persons. The Committee hopes that this Code will very soon be adopted and that it will contain provisions that specifically penalize trafficking in persons for purposes of labour or sexual exploitation and also make provision for suitable penal sanctions. It further hopes that in its next report the Government will be able to provide concrete information on measures taken to combat the phenomenon of trafficking in persons, whether they be on the level of prevention (awareness-raising activities undertaken for vulnerable populations), prosecution (activities carried out for police forces and prosecuting authorities), or protection of victims. Please indicate whether judgements have already been issued by criminal courts and sanctions imposed on persons convicted for this crime.

3. Exploitation of the labour of Aka indigenous peoples known as “Pygmies”. The Committee notes the report of the African Commission’s Working Group on Indigenous Populations/Communities, adopted in 2008 following a research and information visit to the Central African Republic in January 2007. The Committee notes that, according to this report, the practice of “Pygmies’ masters”, or slavery-like practices, still persist in certain regions of the Central African Republic. These consist of an individual or a family holding Aka individuals or entire Aka families in their home or on their lands. The provision of gifts and the incurring of debts means that many of these relationships with the “Pygmies” become relationships of servitude.

This may relate, in particular, to a “master” paying a “Pygmy’s” dowry, to providing him with second-hand clothes, or to representing or defending him before the authorities. According to the report, all these services in reality only serve to create and maintain the “Pygmies” dependency on their “master”. In return for the “assistance” provided, the “Pygmies” carry out work in the fields for their “masters” for little or no remuneration. The masters’ generally expect their “Pygmies” to undertake all kinds of work, at any time of the day and under any condition. In some cases, the “master” also owns the labour his “Pygmies” may provide to third parties for payment. The Committee notes that the Working Group of the African Commission on Indigenous Populations/Communities recommends that the Government set up a national commission with the mandate to investigate alleged cases of slavery-like practices still affecting Aka indigenous peoples, and to take all necessary measures to combat impunity, so that “Pygmies” masters are held responsible for their actions towards the Aka peoples. The Committee hopes that in its next report the Government will provide detailed information about the situation of these peoples in light of the protection guaranteed by this Convention. Please indicate the measures taken to ensure that these peoples are not subjected to work to which they have not consented or are not able to provide a valid consent.

Article 25. Application of adequate penalties. Noting that under provisions of the Labour Code recourse to forced labour may be sanctioned solely by a fine (sections 4 and 228 of the Labour Code, read together), the Committee has drawn the attention of the Government to the penal nature of the sanctions which must be applied to the exaction of forced labour, in accordance with Article 25 of the Convention. The Committee hoped that the question of really adequate sanctions would be examined in the framework of the process of reform of the Penal Code that was under way. In its report the Government indicates that the draft Penal Code validated in March of 2007 was now in the hands of the Government for conveying to the National Assembly with a view to final adoption. It specifies that penal sanctions are provided for in terms of trafficking in persons. The Committee notes this information and hopes that the Penal Code that is going to be adopted will, in addition to provisions prohibiting the trafficking in persons, contain a general provision, according to which the imposition of any form of forced labour shall be punishable by penal sanctions that are really adequate.

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

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

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Idleness, active population and compulsory activities. For many years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the need to formally repeal certain provisions of the national legislation which are contrary to the Convention inasmuch as they constitute a direct or indirect compulsion to work:

–      Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966 with respect to the suppression of idleness, as amended by Ordinance No. 72/083 of 18 October 1972, under which any able-bodied person aged between 18 and 55 years who cannot prove that she or he is engaged in a normal activity providing for her or his subsistence or that she or he is engaged in studies is considered to be idle and liable to a penalty of between one and three years of imprisonment;

–      Ordinance No. 66/038 of June 1966 respecting the supervision of the active population, under which any person aged between 18 and 55 years who cannot justify belonging to one of the eight categories of the active population shall be called up to cultivate land designated by the administrative authorities and shall also be considered a vagabond if apprehended outside her or his sous‑préfecture of origin and shall be liable to a sentence of imprisonment;

–      Ordinance No. 75/005 of 5 January 1975 obliging all citizens to provide proof of the exercise of a commercial, agricultural or pastoral activity and making persons in violation of this provision liable to the most severe penalties; and

–      section 28 of Act No. 60/109 of 27 June 1960 with respect to the development of the rural economy, under which minimum surfaces for cultivation are to be established for each rural community.

In its latest report, the Government indicates that it has decided to hold an inter-ministerial meeting with a view to sensitizing the ministers who initiated these texts about the necessity of repealing them. For practical reasons, this meeting could not be organized; nevertheless, the Labour Administration would spare no effort to bring about the repeal of the aforementioned texts. The Committee takes note of this information. This matter has been the subject of its comments for many years and the Committee expresses the firm hope that the inter-ministerial meeting to which the Government refers will very soon be held, and that it will lead to concrete proposals for the repeal of these texts, which are contrary to the Convention and which, although having fallen into disuse, remain in the national legislative scheme.

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

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

Article 1, paragraph 1, and Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention. 1. Freedom of military service personnel to leave the service of the State. In reply to the comments of the Committee, the Government indicates that military service personnel, having attained 15 years of service, may request a leave of absence for personal reasons. The Committee reminds the Government that legal or statutory provisions which prohibit a worker employed for an indefinite duration, or for a very long period, to terminate his or her employment by means of notice of reasonable length have the effect of transforming a contractual relationship based on the free will of the parties into service by compulsion of law, and are consequently incompatible with the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to please indicate how, in practice, the right of career military service personnel to leave the service in peacetime before 15 years has elapsed is guaranteed, specifying the procedure that must be followed and, if necessary, the sanctions incurred by those personnel who leave the service prior to the end of that period. Please supply copies of relevant statutory provisions.

2. Trafficking in persons. Referring to its previous comments, the Committee regrets that the Government has provided no information on measures taken with a view to preventing, suppressing and punishing the trafficking in persons for purposes of exploitation. The Government indicates only that the Penal Code in the course of adoption provides for sanctions for trafficking in persons. The Committee hopes that this Code will very soon be adopted and that it will contain provisions that specifically penalize trafficking in persons for purposes of labour or sexual exploitation and also make provision for suitable penal sanctions. It further hopes that in its next report the Government will be able to provide concrete information on measures taken to combat the phenomenon of trafficking in persons, whether they be on the level of prevention (awareness-raising activities undertaken for vulnerable populations), prosecution (activities carried out for police forces and prosecuting authorities), or protection of victims. Please indicate whether judgements have already been issued by criminal courts and sanctions imposed on persons convicted for this crime.

3. Exploitation of the labour of Aka indigenous peoples known as “Pygmies”. The Committee notes the report of the African Commission’s Working Group on Indigenous Populations/Communities, adopted in 2008 following a research and information visit to the Central African Republic in January 2007. The Committee notes that, according to this report, the practice of “Pygmies’ masters”, or slavery-like practices, still persist in certain regions of the Central African Republic. These consist of an individual or a family holding Aka individuals or entire Aka families in their home or on their lands. The provision of gifts and the incurring of debts means that many of these relationships with the “Pygmies” become relationships of servitude.

This may relate, in particular, to a “master” paying a “Pygmy’s” dowry, to providing him with second-hand clothes, or to representing or defending him before the authorities. According to the report, all these services in reality only serve to create and maintain the “Pygmies” dependency on their “master”. In return for the “assistance” provided, the “Pygmies” carry out work in the fields for their “masters” for little or no remuneration. The masters’ generally expect their “Pygmies” to undertake all kinds of work, at any time of the day and under any condition. In some cases, the “master” also owns the labour his “Pygmies” may provide to third parties for payment. The Committee notes that the Working Group of the African Commission on Indigenous Populations/Communities recommends that the Government set up a national commission with the mandate to investigate alleged cases of slavery-like practices still affecting Aka indigenous peoples, and to take all necessary measures to combat impunity, so that “Pygmies” masters are held responsible for their actions towards the Aka peoples. The Committee hopes that in its next report the Government will provide detailed information about the situation of these peoples in light of the protection guaranteed by this Convention. Please indicate the measures taken to ensure that these peoples are not subjected to work to which they have not consented or are not able to provide a valid consent.

Article 25. Application of adequate penalties. Noting that under provisions of the Labour Code recourse to forced labour may be sanctioned solely by a fine (sections 4 and 228 of the Labour Code, read together), the Committee has drawn the attention of the Government to the penal nature of the sanctions which must be applied to the exaction of forced labour, in accordance with Article 25 of the Convention. The Committee hoped that the question of really adequate sanctions would be examined in the framework of the process of reform of the Penal Code that was under way. In its report the Government indicates that the draft Penal Code validated in March of 2007 was now in the hands of the Government for conveying to the National Assembly with a view to final adoption. It specifies that penal sanctions are provided for in terms of trafficking in persons. The Committee notes this information and hopes that the Penal Code that is going to be adopted will, in addition to provisions prohibiting the trafficking in persons, contain a general provision, according to which the imposition of any form of forced labour shall be punishable by penal sanctions that are really adequate.

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

Article 1, paragraph 1, and Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention. Idleness, active population and compulsory activities. For many years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the need to formally repeal certain provisions of the national legislation which are contrary to the Convention inasmuch as they constitute a direct or indirect compulsion to work:

–      Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966 with respect to the suppression of idleness, as amended by Ordinance No. 72/083 of 18 October 1972, under which any able-bodied person aged between 18 and 55 years who cannot prove that she or he is engaged in a normal activity providing for her or his subsistence or that she or he is engaged in studies is considered to be idle and liable to a penalty of between one and three years of imprisonment;

–      Ordinance No. 66/038 of June 1966 respecting the supervision of the active population, under which any person aged between 18 and 55 years who cannot justify belonging to one of the eight categories of the active population shall be called up to cultivate land designated by the administrative authorities and shall also be considered a vagabond if apprehended outside her or his sous-préfecture of origin and shall be liable to a sentence of imprisonment;

–      Ordinance No. 75/005 of 5 January 1975 obliging all citizens to provide proof of the exercise of a commercial, agricultural or pastoral activity and making persons in violation of this provision liable to the most severe penalties; and

–      section 28 of Act No. 60/109 of 27 June 1960 with respect to the development of the rural economy, under which minimum surfaces for cultivation are to be established for each rural community.

In its latest report, the Government indicates that it has decided to hold an inter-ministerial meeting with a view to sensitizing the ministers who initiated these texts about the necessity of repealing them. For practical reasons, this meeting could not be organized; nevertheless, the Labour Administration would spare no effort to bring about the repeal of the aforementioned texts. The Committee takes note of this information. This matter has been the subject of its comments for many years and the Committee expresses the firm hope that the inter-ministerial meeting to which the Government refers will very soon be held, and that it will lead to concrete proposals for the repeal of these texts, which are contrary to the Convention and which, although having fallen into disuse, remain in the national legislative scheme.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report contains no reply to previous comments. 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:

Article 1, paragraph 1, and Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention. Freedom to leave the service of the State. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide copies of the provisions of the national legislation under which career members of the armed forces may leave the service in time of peace.

Article 25. Application of adequate penalties. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, under section 228 of the Labour Code, any person who is in violation of section 4 of the above Code, which prohibits recourse to forced or compulsory labour, is liable to a fine of from 5,000 to 50,000 francs and a sentence of imprisonment of between six days and three months, or to one of these two penalties alone. Noting that under this provision the exaction of forced labour may be penalized solely by a fine, the Committee drew the Government’s attention to the penal nature of the sanctions required by Article 25 of the Convention. Having taken notice that a reform of the Penal Code and the Code of Penal Procedure was under way since 2002 in cooperation with the United Nations Peace-Building Office in the Central African Republic (BONUCA), the Committee requested the Government to provide fuller information on this process. The Committee notes that in its report the Government indicates that this process has been suspended pending the installation of the new authorities. The Committee hopes that when the Government will be in a position to resume the process of reform of the Penal Code, it will take account of the above comments in order to ensure that a provision making the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour punishable as a penal offence, in accordance with Article 25 of the Convention, is included in the Penal Code.

Trafficking in persons. Noting that the Government has provided no indications in reply to the information requested by the Committee in its general observation of 2000, the Committee requests it to refer to this observation and to provide information on the measures adopted with a view to preventing, repressing and punishing the trafficking in persons for the purposes of their exploitation and on the difficulties encountered by the public authorities in combating the phenomenon of trafficking.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report contains no reply to previous comments. It must therefore repeat its previous observation on the following matters.

Article 1, paragraph 1, and Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention. Idleness, active population and compulsory activities. Since 1966, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the need to repeal certain provisions of the national legislation under which forced or compulsory labour could be exacted and which are therefore contrary to the Convention:

–      Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966 with respect to the suppression of idleness, as amended by Ordinance No. 72/083 of 18 October 1972, under which any able-bodied person aged between 18 and 55 years who cannot prove that she or he is engaged in a normal activity providing for her or his subsistence or that she or he is engaged in studies is considered to be idle and liable to a penalty of between one and three years of imprisonment;

–      Ordinance No. 66/038 of June 1966 respecting the supervision of the active population, under which any person aged between 18 and 55 years who cannot justify belonging to one of the eight categories of the active population shall be called up to cultivate land designated by the administrative authorities and shall also be considered a vagabond if apprehended outside her or his sous-préfecture of origin and shall be liable to a sentence of imprisonment;

–      Ordinance No. 75/005 of 5 January 1975 obliging all citizens to provide proof of the exercise of a commercial, agricultural or pastoral activity and making persons in violation of this provision liable to the most severe penalties; and

–      section 28 of Act No. 60/109 of 27 June 1960 with respect to the development of the rural economy, under which minimum surfaces for cultivation are to be established for each rural community.

In its latest report, the Government once again indicates that these texts have become obsolete, and that they are being revised in cooperation with the United Nations Peace-Building Office in the Central African Republic (BONUCA) which is awaiting the restoration of constitutional legality. The Government reiterates its commitment to repeal the provisions of these texts which are contrary to the Convention. The Committee takes note of this information. As this matter has been the subject of its comments for many years, the Committee expresses the hope that there will soon be a situation of institutional stability in order to allow the Government to take all the necessary measures to formally repeal the above texts.

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

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

Article 1, paragraph 1, and Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention. Freedom to leave the service of the State. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide copies of the provisions of the national legislation under which career members of the armed forces may leave the service in time of peace.

Article 25. Application of adequate penalties. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, under section 228 of the Labour Code, any person who is in violation of section 4 of the above Code, which prohibits recourse to forced or compulsory labour, is liable to a fine of from 5,000 to 50,000 francs and a sentence of imprisonment of between six days and three months, or to one of these two penalties alone. Noting that under this provision the exaction of forced labour may be penalized solely by a fine, the Committee drew the Government’s attention to the penal nature of the sanctions required by Article 25 of the Convention. Having taken notice that a reform of the Penal Code and the Code of Penal Procedure was under way since 2002 in cooperation with the United Nations Peace-Building Office in the Central African Republic (BONUCA), the Committee requested the Government to provide fuller information on this process. The Committee notes that in its report the Government indicates that this process has been suspended pending the installation of the new authorities. The Committee hopes that when the Government will be in a position to resume the process of reform of the Penal Code, it will take account of the above comments in order to ensure that a provision making the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour punishable as a penal offence, in accordance with Article 25 of the Convention, is included in the Penal Code.

Trafficking in persons. Noting that the Government has provided no indications in reply to the information requested by the Committee in its general observation of 2000, the Committee requests it to refer to this observation and to provide information on the measures adopted with a view to preventing, repressing and punishing the trafficking in persons for the purposes of their exploitation and on the difficulties encountered by the public authorities in combating the phenomenon of trafficking.

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

Article 1, paragraph 1, and Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention.
Idleness, active population and compulsory activities

Since 1966, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the need to repeal certain provisions of the national legislation under which forced or compulsory labour could be exacted and which are therefore contrary to the Convention:

-  Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966 with respect to the suppression of idleness, as amended by Ordinance No. 72/083 of 18 October 1972, under which any able-bodied person aged between 18 and 55 years who cannot prove that she or he is engaged in a normal activity providing for her or his subsistence or that she or he is engaged in studies is considered to be idle and liable to a penalty of between one and three years of imprisonment;

-  Ordinance No. 66/038 of June 1966 respecting the supervision of the active population, under which any person aged between 18 and 55 years who cannot justify belonging to one of the eight categories of the active population shall be called up to cultivate land designated by the administrative authorities and shall also be considered a vagabond if apprehended outside her or his sous-prefecture of origin and shall be liable to a sentence of imprisonment;

-  Ordinance No. 75/005 of 5 January 1975 obliging all citizens to provide proof of the exercise of a commercial, agricultural or pastoral activity and making persons in violation of this provision liable to the most severe penalties; and

-  section 28 of Act No. 60/109 of 27 June 1960 with respect to the development of the rural economy, under which minimum surfaces for cultivation are to be established for each rural community.

In its latest report, the Government once again indicates that these texts have become obsolete, and that they are being revised in cooperation with the United Nations Peace-Building Office in the Central African Republic (BONUCA) which is awaiting the restoration of constitutional legality. The Government reiterates its commitment to repeal the provisions of these texts which are contrary to the Convention. The Committee takes note of this information. As this matter has been the subject of its comments for many years, the Committee expresses the hope that there will soon be a situation of institutional stability in order to allow the Government to take all the necessary measures to formally repeal the above texts.

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

1. Freedom to leave the service of the State. With reference to its previous comments and the Government’s statements on this point, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide copies of the provisions of the national legislation under which career members of the armed services may leave the service in time of peace.

2. Article 25 of the Convention. Application of adequate penalties. The Committee notes that, under section 228 of the Labour Code, any person who is in violation of section 4 of the above Code, which prohibits recourse to forced or compulsory labour, is liable to a fine of from 5,000 to 50,000 francs and a sentence of imprisonment of between six days and three months, or to one of these two penalties alone. Noting that under this provision the exaction of forced labour may be penalized merely by a fine, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the penal nature of the sanctions required by Article 25 of the Convention. In this respect, the Committee notes, according to the information provided by the Central African delegation to the United Nations Human Rights Commission in July 2004, that a reform of the Penal Code and the Code of Penal Procedure, which date from independence, has been under way since 2002 in cooperation with the United Nations Peace-Building Office in the Central African Republic (BUNOCA). The Committee requests the Government to provide fuller information on the process of reforming the penal legislation and, as appropriate, to provide copies of the texts adopted. It hopes that the Government will take advantage of this occasion to include in the Penal Code a provision laying down that the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour shall be punishable as a penal offence, in accordance with Article 25 of the Convention.

3. Trafficking of persons. Noting that the Government has provided no indications in reply to the information requested by the Committee in its general observation of 2000, the Committee requests it to refer to this observation and to provide information on the measures adopted with a view to preventing, repressing and punishing the trafficking of persons for the purposes of their exploitation and on the difficulties encountered by the public authorities in combating the phenomenon of trafficking.

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

Since 1966, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the need to repeal certain provisions of the national legislation under which forced or compulsory labour could be exacted and which are therefore contrary to the Convention:

-  Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966 with respect to the suppression of idleness, as amended by Ordinance No. 72/083 of 18 October 1972, under which any able-bodied person aged between 18 and 55 years who cannot prove that she or he is engaged in a normal activity providing for her or his subsistence or that she or he is engaged in studies is considered to be idle and liable to a penalty of between one and three years of imprisonment;

-  Ordinance No. 66/038 of June 1966 respecting the supervision of the active population, under which any person aged between 18 and 55 years who cannot justify belonging to one of the eight categories of the active population shall be called up to cultivate land designated by the administrative authorities and shall also be considered a vagabond if apprehended outside her or his sous-prefecture of origin and shall be liable to a sentence of imprisonment;

-  Ordinance No. 75/005 of 5 January 1975 obliging all citizens to provide proof of the exercise of a commercial, agricultural or pastoral activity and making persons in violation of this provision liable to the most severe penalties; and

-  section 28 of Act No. 60/109 of 27 June 1960 with respect to the development of the rural economy, under which minimum surfaces for cultivation are to be established for each rural community.

The Government has indicated on several occasions that these texts are obsolete and are no longer applied in practice and that texts to repeal them were under preparation. In its latest report, the Government once again indicates that, even if they have not been explicitly repealed, the legal texts referred to by the Committee are no longer applied. As this matter has been the subject of its comments for many years, the Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary measures in the very near future to formally repeal the above texts so as to ensure legal certainty. In this respect, the Committee reminds the Government that it can have recourse to the technical assistance of the International Labour Office, which may help it to overcome the difficulties encountered in bringing its legislation into compliance with the Conventions on forced labour.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

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:

  Article 2 of the Convention. 1. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to the Government’s statement that members of the armed forces have the right to leave the service freely in peacetime, and asked the Government to provide a copy of the relevant provisions. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide copies of the provisions of the national legislation which concern the right of the various categories of career service personnel to leave the service in time of peace within a reasonable period.

2. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of any decree adopted under section 4 of Ordinance No. 83/010 of 4 February 1983, which repeals the provisions of Ordinance No. 74/017 of 26 January 1974 (establishing a 15-year period of compulsory state service for all persons who have received training at the expense of the State).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

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

Article 1, paragraph 1, and Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention. 1. Since 1966, the Committee has been pointing out to the Government that Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966, respecting the suppression of idleness (as amended by Ordinance No. 72/083 of 18 October 1972) is contrary to the provisions of the Convention. The Committee also drew the Government’s attention to the non-conformity with the Convention of section 11 of Ordinance No. 66/038 of June 1996 respecting the supervision of the active population, and sections 2 and 6 of Ordinance No. 75/005 of 5 January 1975, making the performance of commercial, agricultural and pastoral activities compulsory.

2. The Committee noted the Government’s indications that the abovementioned texts have fallen into abeyance and that measures were to be taken to bring the law and practice into conformity with international labour Conventions. With particular reference to Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966, the Government has been stating for 30 years that repealing legislation has been drafted.

3. The Committee notes that the Government’s report, while indicating that article 8 of the new Constitution of 14 January 1995 abolished forced labour in all its forms, does not contain any other information on the measures adopted to bring the above-mentioned texts into conformity with the Convention. The Committee expresses firmly the hope that in the light of the new Constitution, the Government will take the necessary measures in the very near future to give effect to the Convention.

Article 2, paragraph 2(a), of the Convention. 4. In its previous observations, the Committee noted that section 28 of Act No. 60/109 of 27 June 1960 respecting the development of the rural economy, which provides for minimum surfaces for cultivation to be established for each rural community, is contrary to the requirements of the Convention. The Committee has also noted the Government’s previous indication that the practice of compulsory cultivation no longer existed and that vigorous efforts were being made instead to provide guidance to encourage cultivation. In this light, and in view of the new Constitution, the Committee hopes there will be repeal or amendment of the legislation to bring it into conformity with the Convention.

5. The Committee also noted the Government’s statement that new draft texts would be introduced to reinforce the national legislation on forced labour. It hopes that the new legislation will take into consideration the comments that it has been making on this subject for many years and that the Government will transmit copies of the texts adopted.

6. The Committee had reminded the Government that it may call upon the technical assistance of the International Labour Office to help it resolve difficulties encountered in bringing its legislation into conformity with the ILO’s Conventions on forced labour.

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

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

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 following matters raised in its previous direct request.

Article 2 of the Convention.  1.  In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to the Government’s statement that members of the armed forces have the right to leave the service freely in peacetime, and asked the Government to provide a copy of the relevant provisions. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide copies of the provisions of the national legislation which concern the right of the various categories of career service personnel to leave the service in time of peace within a reasonable period.

2.  The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of any decree adopted under section 4 of Ordinance No. 83/010 of 4 February 1983, which repeals the provisions of Ordinance No. 74/017 of 26 January 1974 (establishing a 15-year period of compulsory state service for all persons who have received training at the expense of the State).

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

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

  Article 1, paragraph 1, and Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention.  1.  Since 1966, the Committee has been pointing out to the Government that Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966, respecting the suppression of idleness (as amended by Ordinance No. 72/083 of 18 October 1972) is contrary to the provisions of the Convention. The Committee also drew the Government’s attention to the non-conformity with the Convention of section 11 of Ordinance No. 66/038 of June 1996 respecting the supervision of the active population, and sections 2 and 6 of Ordinance No. 75/005 of 5 January 1975, making the performance of commercial, agricultural and pastoral activities compulsory.

2.  The Committee noted the Government’s indications that the above-mentioned texts have fallen into abeyance and that measures were to be taken to bring the law and practice into conformity with international labour Conventions. With particular reference to Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966, the Government has been stating for 30 years that repealing legislation has been drafted.

3.  The Committee notes that the Government’s report, while indicating that article 8 of the new Constitution of 14 January 1995 abolished forced labour in all its forms, does not contain any other information on the measures adopted to bring the above-mentioned texts into conformity with the Convention. The Committee expresses firmly the hope that in the light of the new Constitution, the Government will take the necessary measures in the very near future to give effect to the Convention.

  Article 2, paragraph 2(a), of the Convention.  4.  In its previous observations, the Committee noted that section 28 of Act No. 60/109 of 27 June 1960 respecting the development of the rural economy, which provides for minimum surfaces for cultivation to be established for each rural community, is contrary to the requirements of the Convention. The Committee has also noted the Government’s previous indication that the practice of compulsory cultivation no longer existed and that vigorous efforts were being made instead to provide guidance to encourage cultivation. In this light, and in view of the new Constitution, the Committee hopes there will be repeal or amendment of the legislation to bring it into conformity with the Convention.

5.  The Committee also notes the Government’s statement that new draft texts will be introduced to reinforce the national legislation on forced labour. It hopes that the new legislation will take into consideration the comments that it has been making on this subject for many years and that it will transmit copies of the texts which are adopted.

6.  The Committee reminds the Government that it may call upon the technical assistance of the International Labour Office to help it resolve difficulties encountered in bringing its legislation into conformity with the ILO’s Conventions on forced labour.

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

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

The Committee notes with regret that the Government's report does not contain a reply to the following points which were raised in its previous direct request. It hopes that the next report will contain the requested information.

Article 2 of the Convention. 1. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the Government's statement that members of the armed forces have the right to leave the service freely in peacetime, and asked the Government to provide a copy of the relevant provisions. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide copies of the provisions of the national legislation which concern the right of the various categories of career service personnel to leave the service in time of peace within a reasonable period.

2. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of any decree adopted under section 4 of Ordinance No. 83/010 of 4 February 1983, which repeals the provisions of Ordinance No. 74/017 of 26 January 1974 (establishing a 15-year period of compulsory state service for all persons who have received training at the expense of the State).

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

Article 1, paragraph 1, and Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention. 1. Since 1966, the Committee has been pointing out to the Government that Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966, respecting the suppression of idleness (as amended by Ordinance No. 72/083 of 18 October 1972) is contrary to the provisions of the Convention. The Committee also drew the Government's attention to the non-conformity with the Convention of section 11 of Ordinance No. 66/038 of June 1996 respecting the supervision of the active population, and sections 2 and 6 of Ordinance No. 75/005 of 5 January 1975, making the performance of commercial, agricultural and pastoral activities compulsory.

2. The Committee noted the Government's indications that the above-mentioned texts have fallen into abeyance and that measures were to be taken to bring the law and practice into conformity with international labour Conventions. With particular reference to Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966, the Government has been stating for 30 years that repealing legislation has been drafted.

3. The Committee notes that the Government's report, while indicating that article 8 of the new Constitution of 14 January 1995 abolished forced labour in all its forms, does not contain any other information on the measures adopted to bring the above-mentioned texts into conformity with the Convention. The Committee expresses firmly the hope that in the light of the new Constitution, the Government will take the necessary measures in the very near future to give effect to the Convention.

4. Article 2, paragraph 2(a), of the Convention. 4. In its previous observations, the Committee noted that section 28 of Act No. 60/109 of 27 June 1960 respecting the development of the rural economy, which provides for minimum surfaces for cultivation to be established for each rural community, is contrary to the requirements of the Convention. The Committee has also noted the Government's previous indication that the practice of compulsory cultivation no longer existed and that vigorous efforts were being made instead to provide guidance to encourage cultivation. In this light, and in view of the new Constitution, the Committee hopes there will be repeal or amendment of the legislation to bring it into conformity with the Convention.

5. The Committee also notes the Government's statement that new draft texts will be introduced to reinforce the national legislation on forced labour. It hopes that the new legislation will take into consideration the comments that it has been making on this subject for many years and that it will transmit copies of the texts which are adopted.

6. The Committee reminds the Government that it may call upon the technical assistance of the International Labour Office to help it resolve difficulties encountered in bringing its legislation into conformity with the ILO's Conventions on forced labour.

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

The Committee notes that the Government's report does not contain a reply to the following points which were raised in its previous direct request. It hopes that the next report will contain the requested information.

1. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the Government's statement that members of the armed forces have the right to leave the service freely in peacetime, and asked the Government to provide a copy of the relevant provisions.

The Committee once again requests the Government to provide copies of the provisions of the national legislation which concern the right of the various categories of career servicemen to leave the service in time of peace within a reasonable period.

2. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of any decree adopted under section 4 of Ordinance No. 83/010 of 4 February 1983, which repeals the provisions of Ordinance No. 74/017 of 26 January 1974 (establishing a 15-year period of compulsory state service for all persons who have received training at the expense of the State).

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

1. In its comments, the Committee has been referring for many years to the Government's statement that draft ordinances have been drawn up with a view to repealing Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966, respecting the suppression of idleness (as amended by Ordinance No. 72/083 of 18 October 1972), section 11 of Ordinance 66/038 of 3 June 1966, respecting the supervision of the active population, and sections 2 and 6 of Ordinance No. 75/005 of 5 January 1975, making the performance of commercial, agricultural and pastoral activities compulsory. The Government indicated that the Ordinances in question had become obsolete and are no longer applicable, and that the draft texts to repeal them formally were to be submitted to an expanded committee of the social partners. The Government also stated that it was aware of the need to bring its legislation and practice into conformity with international labour Conventions.

The Committee noted the information supplied by the Government in its report for the period up to June 1992, to the effect that a Bill had been introduced for the repeal of Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966, respecting the suppression of idleness.

The Committee noted this information. In view of the fact that the Government had been referring to texts to repeal the above Ordinances for many years, the Committee expressed the hope that the Government would supply the text of the Bill to repeal Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966, respecting the suppression of idleness, when adopted, and that it would supply information on the other amendments required to give effect to the Convention on these points.

2. In its previous observations, the Committee also referred to section 28 of Act No. 60/109, respecting the development of the rural economy, which provides that minimum surfaces for cultivation shall be fixed for each rural community.

The Committee noted the Government's indications that these provisions were intended to supply a technical framework and basic services to farmers in order to increase their production, improve their standard of living, and encourage them to expand the areas under cultivation and increase efforts in agricultural activities, since the freedom to work must not mean the freedom to do nothing. The Committee pointed out that the Convention authorizes recourse to compulsory cultivation only for the prevention of famine or a food deficit, and always under the condition that the food remains the property of the producers. It also pointed out that any work or service exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily is incompatible with the Convention.

The Committee notes that the Government's last report does not contain a reply to the above comments. It hopes that full information will be supplied in the near future.

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 notes that the Government's report contains no information in reply to its previous direct request. 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 points:

1. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the Government's statements that members of the armed forces have the right to leave the service freely in peacetime, and asked the Government to provide a copy of the relevant provisions.

The Committee once again requests the Government to provide copies of the provisions of the national legislation which concern the right of the various categories of career servicemen to leave the service in time of peace within a reasonable period.

2. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of any decree adopted under section 4 of Ordinance No. 83/010 of 4 February 1983, which repeals the provisions of Ordinance No. 74/017 of 26 January 1974 (establishing a 15-year period of compulsory state service for all persons who have received training at the expense of the State).

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

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 its comments, the Committee has been referring for many years to the Government's statement that draft ordinances have been drawn up with a view to repealing Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966, respecting the suppression of idleness (as amended by Ordinance No. 72/083 of 18 October 1972), section 11 of Ordinance No. 66/038 of 3 June 1966, respecting the supervision of the active population, and sections 2 and 6 of Ordinance No. 75/005 of 5 January 1975, making the performance of commercial, agricultural and pastoral activities compulsory. The Government indicated that the Ordinances in question have fallen into abeyance and are no longer applicable, and that the draft texts to repeal them formally had to be submitted to an expanded committee of the social partners. The Government also stated that it was aware of the need to bring its legislation and practice into conformity with international labour Conventions. The Committee noted the information supplied by the Government in its report for the period up to June 1992 to the effect that Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966, respecting the suppression of idleness, was to be repealed by a Bill which had been elaborated and that an expanded committee did in fact exist and was called the Legislative Commission. The Committee took note of this information. In view of the fact that the Government had been referring to texts to repeal the above Ordinances for many years, the Committee again expresses the hope that the Government will supply the text of the Bill to repeal Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966, respecting the suppression of idleness when adopted and that it will supply information on the other amendments which are necessary to give effect to the Convention on these points. 2. In its previous observations, the Committee also referred to section 28 of Act No. 60/109, respecting the development of the rural economy, which provides that minimum surfaces for cultivation shall be fixed for each rural community. The Committee noted the Government's indications that these provisions were intended to supply a technical framework and basic services to farmers in order to increase their production, improve their standard of living, encourage them to expand the areas under cultivation and increase efforts in agricultural activities, since the freedom to work must not mean the freedom to do nothing. The Committee pointed out that the Convention authorizes recourse to compulsory cultivation only for preventing famine or a food deficit, and always under the condition that the food or produce shall remain the property of the producers. It also pointed out that any work or service exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily is incompatible with the Convention. The Committee noted that the Government's report did not contain information in this respect.

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

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

The Committee notes that the Government's report does not contain any information in reply to its previous direct request. 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 points:

1. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the Government's statements that members of the armed forces have the right to leave the service freely in peacetime, and asked the Government to provide a copy of the relevant provisions.

The Committee once again requests the Government to provide copies of the provisions of the national legislation which concern the right of the various categories of career servicemen to leave the service in time of peace within a reasonable period.

2. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of any decree adopted under section 4 of Ordinance No. 83/010 of 4 February 1983, which repeals the provisions of Ordinance No. 74/017 of 26 January 1974 (establishing a 15-year period of compulsory state service for all persons who have received training at the expense of the State).

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

1. In its comments, the Committee has been referring for many years to the Government's statement that draft ordinances have been drawn up with a view to repealing Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966, respecting the suppression of idleness (as amended by Ordinance No. 72/083 of 18 October 1972), section 11 of Ordinance No. 66/038 of 3 June 1966, respecting the supervision of the active population, and sections 2 and 6 of Ordinance No. 75/005 of 5 January 1975, making the performance of commercial, agricultural and pastoral activities compulsory. The Government indicated that the Ordinances in question have fallen into abeyance and are no longer applicable, and that the draft texts to repeal them formally had to be submitted to an expanded committee of the social partners. The Government also stated that it was aware of the need to bring its legislation and practice into conformity with international labour Conventions.

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its last report to the effect that Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966, respecting the suppression of idleness, is covered by a Bill to repeal it and that an expanded committee does in fact exist and is called the Legislative Commission.

The Committee takes due note of this information. In view of the fact that the Government has been referring to texts to repeal the above Ordinances for many years, the Committee hopes that the Government will supply the text of the Bill to repeal Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966, respecting the suppression of idleness when adopted and that it will supply information on the other amendments which are necessary to give effect to the Convention on these points.

2. In its previous observations, the Committee also referred to section 28 of Act No. 60/109, respecting the development of the rural economy, which provides that minimum surfaces for cultivation shall be fixed for each rural community.

The Committee noted the Government's indications that these provisions were intended to supply a technical framework and basic services to farmers in order to increase their production, improve their standard of living, encourage them to expand the areas under cultivation and increase efforts in agricultural activities, since the freedom to work must not mean the freedom to do nothing. The Committee pointed out that the Convention authorizes recourse to compulsory cultivation only for preventing famine or a food deficit, and always under the condition that the food or produce shall remain the property of the producers. It also pointed out that any work or service exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily is incompatible with the Convention.

The Committee notes that the Government's report does not contain information in this respect and trusts that the Government will make every endeavour to take the necessary measures in the near future.

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

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 following matters raised in its previous direct request:

1. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the Government's statement that members of the armed forces have the right to leave the service freely in peacetime, and asked the Government to provide a copy of the relevant provisions.

In the absence of any information in the last two reports, the Committee again requests the Government to provide copies of the provisions of the national legislation which concern the right of the various categories of career servicemen to leave the service in time of peace within a reasonable period.

2. The Committee again asks the Government to provide a copy of any decrees adopted under section 4 of Ordinance No. 83/010 of 4 February 1983 repealing the provisions of Ordinance No. 74/017 of 26 January 1974 (establishing a 15-year period of compulsory state service for all persons who have received training at the expense of the State).

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

The Committee has taken note of the discussion which took place in the Conference Committee in 1990. It notes that no report was since received from the Government. The Committee must therefore repeat its previous observation on the following points:

1. In its comments, the Committee has been referring for many years to the Government's statement that draft ordinances have been drawn up with a view to repealing Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966 respecting the suppression of idleness (as amended by Ordinance No. 72/083 of 18 October 1972), section 11 of Ordinance No. 66/038 of 3 June 1966 respecting the supervision of the active population, and sections 2 and 6 of Ordinance No. 75/005 of 5 January 1975 making the performance of commercial, agricultural and pastoral activities compulsory. The Government indicated previously that, by reason of the economic and social effect of these texts, they were to be submitted to an expanded committee bringing together all the social partners with a view to assessing more accurately the effects of repealing them at the social and economic level. It also stated that the texts of the ordinances adopted under the former regime have fallen into abeyance and are no longer applicable, although this does not mean that it is not necessary to repeal them formally. The Committee noted the Government's repeated statements that it was aware of the need to bring its legislation and practice into conformity with the provisions of ratified international Conventions, and that draft legislation to this end had been submitted to the Assembly. The Committee expressed the hope that the Government would shortly be able to report that the necessary modifications had been adopted to ensure compliance with the Convention in this respect. 2. In its previous observations, the Committee also referred to section 28 of Act No. 60/109, respecting the development of the rural economy, which provides that minimum surfaces for cultivation shall be fixed for each rural community. The Committee noted the Government's indications that these provisions were intended to supply a technical framework and basic services to farmers in order to increase their production, improve their standard of living, encourage them to expand the areas under cultivation and increase efforts in agricultural activities, since the freedom to work must not mean the freedom to do nothing. The Committee pointed out that the Convention authorises recourse to compulsory cultivation only for preventing famine or a food deficit, and always under the condition that the food or produce shall remain the property of the producers. It also pointed out that any work or service exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily is incompatible with the Convention. The Committee expressed the hope that on this point, too, the Government would be able to indicate shortly that the necessary amendments had been adopted to ensure compliance with the Convention.

The Committees notes the Government's indication to the Conference Committee that measures have been taken by the Department of Labour to encourage the competent authorities to accelerate the adoption of these texts.

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

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

1. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the Government's statement that members of the armed forces have the right to leave the service freely in peacetime, and asked the Government to provide a copy of the relevant provisions.

In the absence of any information in the last two reports, the Committee again requests the Government to provide copies of the provisions of the national legislation which concern the right of the various categories of career servicemen to leave the service in time of peace within a reasonable period.

2. The Committee asks the Government to provide a copy of any decrees adopted under section 4 of Ordinance No. 83/010 of 4 February 1983 repealing the provisions of Ordinance No. 74/017 of 28 June 1974 (establishing a 15-year period of compulsory state service for all persons who have received training at the expense of the State).

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

The Committee notes the Government's report.

1. In its comments, the Committee has been referring for many years to the Government's statement that draft ordinances have been drawn up with a view to repealing Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966 respecting the suppression of idleness (as amended by Ordinance No. 72/083 of 18 October 1972), section 11 of Ordinance No. 66/038 of 3 June 1966 respecting the supervision of the active population, and sections 2 and 6 of Ordinance No. 75/005 of 5 January 1975 making the performance of commercial, agricultural and pastoral activities compulsory. The Government indicated previously that, by reason of the economic and social effect of these texts, they were to be submitted to an expanded committee bringing together all the social partners with a view to assessing more accurately the effects of repealing them at the social and economic level. It also stated that the texts of the ordinances adopted under the former regime have fallen into abeyance and are no longer applicable, although this does not mean that it is not necessary to repeal them formally.

The Committee notes the Government's repeated statements that it is aware of the need to bring its legislation and practice into conformity with the provisions of ratified international Conventions, and that draft legislation to this end has been submitted to the Assembly. The Committee hopes that the Government will shortly be able to report that the necessary modifications have been adopted to ensure compliance with the Convention in this respect.

2. In its previous observations, the Committee also referred to section 28 of Act No. 60/109, respecting the development of the rural economy, which provides that minimum surfaces for cultivation shall be fixed for each rural community.

The Committee noted the Government's indications that these provisions were intended to supply a technical framework and basic services to farmers in order to increase their production, improve their standard of living, encourage them to expand the areas under cultivation and increase efforts in agricultural activities, since the freedom to work must not mean the freedom to do nothing. The Committee pointed out that the Convention authorises recourse to compulsory cultivation only for preventing famine or a food deficit, and always under the condition that the food or produce shall remain the property of the producers. It also pointed out that any work or service exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily is incompatible with the Convention.

The Committee hopes that on this point too, the Government will be able to indicate shortly that the necessary amendments have been adopted to ensure compliance with the Convention.