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

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

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

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

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

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Provisions concerning vagrancy. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that, in spite of the fact that the Criminal Code of 2000 contains no provision concerning vagrancy (which was punishable under the old Criminal Code), vagrancy is still punishable under section 307.1 of the Code of Administrative Offences, which provides that, under certain conditions, the persons concerned may be taken into administrative custody for a term of up to ten days. It has also noted the Government’s repeated indications in its reports, including the latest report received in 2010, that section 307.1 is applicable to persons without a definite place of living nor means of subsistence, who do not have employment (without having an official status of the unemployed) and gain their income by pilfering or mendicancy.

While noting these indications, the Committee points out once again that section 307.1 is worded in such general terms as to lend itself to application as a means of indirect compulsion to work. The Committee again draws the Government’s attention to the explanations in paragraph 88 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour, where it has considered that the provisions imposing penalties for mere refusal to work are contrary to the Convention and should be either repealed or amended so as to limit their scope to unlawful activities.

The Committee reiterates its hope that the necessary measures will be taken with a view to clearly excluding from the legislation any possibility of compulsion to work, for example, by limiting the scope of section 307.1 of the Code of Administrative Offences to persons engaging in illegal activities (pilfering, etc.), so as to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention. Pending the adoption of such measures, and noting also the Government’s indications concerning the meaning of “vagrancy” in section 307.1, the Committee requests the Government to supply information on the application of this provision in practice, including copies of any court decisions which could define or illustrate its scope.

Article 2(2)(a). Work exacted under compulsory military service laws for non-military purposes. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 9(1) of the Act on the Status of Military Personnel, 1991, under which military servicemen, during the period of their service, may be made to perform work or other tasks not related to military service, in accordance with the procedure laid down by the President of the Azerbaijan Republic. The Committee has noted the Government’s repeated statement in its reports, that the armed forces may be called upon to fulfil duties which do not relate to their direct obligations, following the decision of Parliament and at the request of the President of the Republic, for example, during the state of emergency.

In its latest report received in 2010, the Government confirms its previous indication that the abovementioned provisions have not been applied in practice. The Government also reiterates its view that such provisions are not in contradiction with the Convention and the Constitution of the Republic of Azerbaijan, which allow the exaction of compulsory work or service under compulsory military service laws and in cases of emergency.

While noting these indications, the Committee recalls once again that Article 2(2)(a) of the Convention excludes work or service exacted by virtue of compulsory military service laws from the prohibition of forced labour only if such work or service is of a purely military character. The Committee again draws the Government’s attention to the explanations in paragraphs 43–46 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour, in which it pointed out that the use of conscripts for non-military purposes may be permitted only in cases of emergency, as defined in the Convention. It may be also mentioned in this connection that the provisions of the Convention relating to compulsory military service do not apply to career military servicemen, and the Convention consequently is not opposed to the performance of non-military work by persons serving in the armed forces on a voluntary basis.

In light of the above considerations, the Committee reiterates its hope that measures will be taken, for example, on the occasion of a possible future revision of the legislation, to indicate clearly that conscripts undergoing compulsory military service may be used only for purely military ends, with the exception of emergency situations. Pending the revision, the Committee again requests the Government to provide any information on the application of the abovementioned section 9(1) in practice, if and when such information becomes available.

Article 2(2)(c). Work of prisoners for private enterprises. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 95.1 of the Code on the Execution of Penal Sentences (2000), under which every convicted person is under an obligation to work, such work being exacted from convicts either at enterprises and workshops of the penitentiary institutions or at other enterprises, outside the penitentiary institution, including private enterprises. As regards conditions of work of convicted persons, the Committee previously noted that they are governed by the general labour legislation and may be considered as approximating those of a free labour relationship, including remuneration and social security rights. It also notes the Government’s further clarifications concerning prisoners’ conditions of work provided by the Government in its 2010 report. The Committee has also noted the Government’s repeated indication in its reports that the work of convicts at enterprises outside the penitentiary institution is carried out under the supervision of the Ministry of Justice.

While noting these indications, the Committee again draws the Government’s attention to the provisions of Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention, which expressly prohibits that convicted prisoners are hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations, in a sense that the exception from the scope of the Convention provided for in this Article for compulsory prison labour does not extend to work of prisoners for private employers, even under public supervision and control. However, the Committee has considered, as explained in paragraphs 59 and 60 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour, that work for private enterprises can be compatible with Article 2(2)(c) only where prisoners voluntarily enter a normal employment relationship with private employers and perform work in conditions approximating a free employment relationship. This arrangement necessarily requires the formal consent of the person concerned and, in light of the circumstances of the consent, that is, the basic obligation to perform prison labour, and other restrictions on the prisoner’s freedom to take up normal employment, there must be further guarantees and safeguards covering the essential elements of a labour relation, such as wages and social security. If the above conditions are complied with, the work of prisoners will be removed from the scope of Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention, since no compulsion is involved.

While noting that, under the Code on the Execution of Penal Sentences, prisoners’ conditions of work may be considered as approximating those of a free labour relationship, the Committee observes that, under the legislation in force, the formal consent of prisoners to work for private enterprises does not appear to be asked for.

The Committee therefore reiterates its hope that, in light of the above considerations, the Government will take the necessary measures in order to ensure that, both in legislation and in practice, the work of prisoners for private enterprises will be carried out only with their voluntary and informed consent, such consent being free from the menace of any penalty, including the loss of rights or privileges. The Committee also requests the Government to supply sample copies of contracts concluded between a private enterprise and a penitentiary institution concerning the work of convicted prisoners.

Article 2(2)(d). Legislation concerning emergency situations. While having noted the Government’s repeated indication in its reports that the relevant provisions have not been applied in practice during the reporting period, the Committee again requests the Government to supply, with its next reports, a copy of the Law on the State of Emergency, which was adopted and entered into force in 2004.

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. Trafficking in persons. Referring to its earlier comments, the Committee notes the establishment of the Centre of assistance to victims of trafficking in persons, by the Decree of the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection of 22 January 2007, as well as the Government’s brief indications, including statistics, concerning the practical functioning of the Centre, in accordance with the provisions of the Regulations on Social Rehabilitation of the Human Trafficking Victims (of 6 March 2006, No. 62).

While noting these indications, the Committee again requests the Government to provide information on the penal proceedings which have been instituted under section 144-1 of the Criminal Code and on the penalties imposed on perpetrators. Please also continue to provide information on the application in practice of above Decree No. 62, as well as information on any other measures, taken or envisaged, to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons for the purpose of exploitation, taken in accordance with the National Plan of Action against Human Trafficking of 2004.

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

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. Vulnerable situation of migrant workers in the construction sector. The Committee notes the communication dated 1 September 2010 received from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), which contains comments on the application of the Convention by Azerbaijan. It also notes the Government’s reply to this communication received on 29 November 2010.

The Communication by the ITUC contains allegations concerning the situation of about 700 workers from Bosnia and Herzegovina, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Serbia who were working on construction sites managed by the SerbAz Design and Construction Company in Azerbaijan. The ITUC refers in this connection to the reports received from the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and from ASTRA (Anti-Trafficking Action), an NGO in Serbia. According to the allegations, workers had been recruited in Bosnia and Herzegovina and, once in Azerbaijan, were not provided with any legal work permits, but only with tourist visas, having also to hand over their passports to their employer. Without identification documents and residence permits, workers’ freedom of movement was limited and their vulnerability was aggravated by the fact that they were obliged to live at the construction site, being strictly forbidden to leave, subject to threats of penalties, including physical punishment. The ITUC further alleged that workers had been living in appalling conditions, with insufficient food, water or proper medical services, which lead to two deaths.

The ITUC expressed the view that there have been indications of forced labour in this case, which include, inter alia, the use of threats and abuse of workers’ vulnerability; coercion; deception regarding working and living conditions; physical punishment, high recruitment fees; withholding of wages; salary deductions; confiscation of documents; absence of work permits; limitations to freedom of movement; and absence of regular employment contracts.

The ITUC informs that the OSCE representative visited the constructions sites and confirmed the poor living conditions and apparent threats to workers. The Azeri Parliament was also informed of the situation and debated the issue, coinciding with the submission of the annual report of the Azerbaijan National Anti-Trafficking Coordinator, which stated, however, that the situation of Serbian and Bosnian workers did not fall within Azerbaijan’s jurisdiction, since the workers signed work agreements with SerbAz in their countries of origin. According to the above communication by the ITUC, some investigations have been initiated by national authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Azerbaijan; in December 2009, investigations concerning 14 accused were in process in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the case had been forwarded to the Public Prosecutor’s Office. A petition to the Ombudsman in Azerbaijan had also been prepared, and about 500 workers in Bosnia and Herzegovina were preparing to submit a case to the court in Azerbaijan to claim unpaid wages and other violations of workers’ rights.

Finally, the ITUC informs that, in April 2010, a cooperation agreement on mutual protection of migrant workers, prepared with the assistance of the Building and Wood Workers’ International (BWI), had been signed by construction workers’ unions from Bosnia and Herzegovina and from Azerbaijan.

In its reply to the comments submitted by the ITUC, the Government denies the allegations, indicating that no direct appeals from workers employed by SerbAz regarding labour violations have been submitted to the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection of Population of the Republic of Azerbaijan. It further indicates that the only information concerning workers’ rights violations had been received from the NGO “Azerbaijan Migration Centre”, and that an appropriate investigation has been subsequently conducted by the State Labour Inspectorate, which did not confirm the allegations against the SerbAz company. According to the investigation, “it was defined that some specialists from a number of foreign countries were on their business trip” for that company. Finally, the Government informs that no individual work permits for foreign citizens have been obtained by the SerbAz company.

While noting the above information and considering the gravity of the allegations, the Committee expresses the firm hope that the Government will take the necessary measures to thoroughly investigate the alleged facts, and will provide information on measures taken or envisaged in order to strengthen the protection of migrant workers, so as to prevent the abuses of workers’ rights and to exclude the exploitation of their vulnerable situation which might lead to the exaction of labour for which the workers have not offered themselves voluntarily. The Committee also requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the outcome of any legal proceedings which have been instituted regarding this case.

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

Articles 1 (paragraph 1), and 2 (paragraph 1), of the Convention. Provisions concerning vagrancy. The Committee previously noted that a provision concerning vagrancy contained in the old Criminal Code had not been included into the new Criminal Code of 2000. However, the Committee noted that vagrancy is still punishable under section 307.1 of the Code of Administrative Offences, which provides that, under certain conditions, the persons concerned may be taken into administrative custody for a term of up to ten days. It has also noted the Government’s repeated indications in its reports that section 307.1 is applicable to persons without a definite place of living or means of subsistence, who do not have employment (without having an official status of unemployed) and gain their income by pilfering and mendicancy.

While taking due note of this information, the Committee observes that section 307.1 is worded in such general terms as to lend itself to application as a means of indirect compulsion to work. The Committee again draws the Government’s attention to the explanations in paragraph 88 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, where it has considered that the provisions imposing penalties for mere refusal to work are contrary to the Convention and should be either repealed or amended so as to limit their scope to the unlawful activities.

The Committee reiterates its hope that the necessary measures will be taken with a view to clearly excluding from the legislation any possibility of compulsion to work, e.g. by limiting the scope of section 307.1 of the Code of Administrative Offences to persons engaging in illegal activities (pilfering, etc.), so as to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention. Pending the adoption of such measures, and noting also the Government’s indications concerning the meaning of ”vagrancy” in section 307.1, the Committee requests the Government to supply information on the application of this provision in practice, including copies of any court decisions which could define or illustrate its scope.

Article 2, paragraph 2, subparagraph (a). Work exacted under compulsory military service laws for non-military purposes. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 9(1) of the Act on the Status of Military Personnel, 1991, under which military servicemen, during the period of their service, may be made to perform work or other tasks not related to military service, in accordance with the procedure laid down by the President of the Azerbaijan Republic. The Committee has noted the Government’s repeated statement in its reports that the armed forces may be called upon to fulfil duties which do not relate to their direct obligations, following the decision of Parliament and at the request of the President of the Republic, e.g. during a state of emergency.

In its latest report received in 2008, the Government confirms its previous indication that the abovementioned provisions have not been applied in practice. The Government also states that, in its view, such provisions are not in contradiction with the Convention and the Constitution of the Republic of Azerbaijan, which allow the exaction of compulsory work or service under compulsory military service laws and in cases of emergency.

While noting these views and comments, the Committee again recalls that, under Article 2(2)(a) of the Convention, work or service exacted by virtue of compulsory military service laws may only be excluded from the prohibition of forced labour if such work or service is of a purely military character. The Committee also draws the Government’s attention once again to the explanations in paragraphs 43–46 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, in which it pointed out that the use of conscripts for non-military purposes may be permitted only in cases of emergency, as defined in the Convention. It may be also mentioned in this connection that the provisions of the Convention relating to compulsory military service do not apply to career military servicemen, and the Convention consequently is not opposed to the performance of non-military work by persons serving in the armed forces on a voluntary basis.

In the light of the above considerations, the Committee reiterates its hope that measures will be taken, e.g. on the occasion of a possible future revision of the legislation, to indicate clearly that conscripts undergoing compulsory military service may be used only for purely military ends, with the exception of the emergency situations. Pending the revision, the Committee requests the Government to provide any information on the application of the abovementioned section 9(1) in practice, if and when such information becomes available.

Article 2, paragraph 2, subparagraph (c). Work of prisoners for private enterprises. The Committee previously noted that, under section 95.1 of the Code on the Execution of Penal Sentences (2000), every convicted person is under an obligation to work, such work being exacted from convicts either at enterprises and workshops of the penitentiary institutions or at other enterprises, outside the penitentiary institution, including private enterprises. As regards conditions of work of convicted persons, the Committee noted that they are governed by the general labour legislation and may be considered as approximating those of a free labour relationship, including remuneration and social security rights. The Committee has also noted the Government’s repeated indication in its reports that the work of convicts at the enterprises outside the penitentiary institution is carried out under the supervision of the Ministry of Justice.

As regards prison labour for private enterprises, the Committee again draws the Government’s attention to the provisions of Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention, which expressly prohibits that convicted prisoners are hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations, in a sense that the exception from the scope of the Convention provided for in this Article for compulsory prison labour does not extend to work of prisoners for private employers, even under public supervision and control. In fact, under this provision of the Convention, work or service exacted from any person as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law is excluded from the scope of the Convention only if two conditions are met, namely: (i) that the said work or service is carried out under the supervision and control of a public authority; and (ii) that the said person is not hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations. The Committee has always made it clear that the two conditions are applied cumulatively, i.e. the fact that the prisoner remains at all times under the supervision and control of a public authority does not in itself dispense the Government from fulfilling the second condition, namely that the person is not hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations. While noting the Government's indication that, in conformity with the first condition set out in Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention, the work is carried out “under the supervision and control of a public authority”, the Committee observes that the second condition, namely, that the person “is not hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations”, does not appear to be fulfilled.

However, while Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention strictly prohibits that prisoners be hired to or placed at the disposal of private enterprises, the Committee has considered, as explained in paragraphs 59 and 60 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, that work for private enterprises can be compatible with Article 2(2)(c) only where prisoners voluntarily enter a normal employment relationship with private employers and perform work in conditions approximating a free employment relationship. This arrangement necessarily requires the formal consent of the person concerned and, in the light of the circumstances of the consent, i.e. the basic obligation to perform prison labour, and other restrictions on the prisoner’s freedom to take up normal employment, there must be further guarantees and safeguards covering the essential elements of a labour relation, such as wages and social security. If the above conditions are complied with, the work of prisoners will be removed from the scope of Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention, since no compulsion is involved.

While noting that, under the Code on the Execution of Penal Sentences, prisoners’ conditions of work may be considered as approximating those of a free labour relationship, the Committee observes that, under the legislation in force, the formal consent of prisoners to work for private enterprises does not appear to be asked for.

The Committee therefore hopes that, in the light of the above considerations, the Government will take the necessary measures in order to ensure that, both in the legislation and in practice, the work of prisoners for private enterprises is carried out only with their voluntary consent, such consent being free from the menace of any penalty, including the loss of rights or privileges. The Committee also requests the Government to supply sample copies of contracts concluded between a private enterprise and a penitentiary institution concerning the work of convicted prisoners.

Article 2, paragraph 2, subparagraph (d). Legislation concerning emergency situations. While noting the Government’s indication in the report that the relevant provisions have not been applied in practice during the reporting period, the Committee once again requests the Government to supply, with its next reports, a copy of the Law on the state of emergency, which was adopted and entered into force in 2004.

Articles 1 (paragraph 1), 2 (paragraph 1), and 25, of the Convention. Trafficking in persons. Referring to its earlier comments, the Committee notes with interest the adoption by the Cabinet of Ministers of the following Decrees for the purpose of implementation of the Law on combating trafficking in human beings: Regulations on social rehabilitation of the human trafficking victims of 6 March 2006 (No. 62); on the rules concerning the establishment of specialized enterprises for the human trafficking victims, their activities, financing and supervision of 9 November 2005 (No. 203); and on the calculation of the allowances for the human trafficking victims of 17 June 2006 (No. 152). It also notes with interest the adoption of the new section 144-1 of the Criminal Code punishing a crime of human trafficking and related crimes with sentences of imprisonment ranging from five to 15 years.

The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the penal proceedings which have been instituted under section 144-1 of the Criminal Code and on the penalties imposed on perpetrators. Please also provide information on the application in practice of Decrees Nos 62, 152 and 203 referred to above, as well as information on any other measures to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons for the purpose of exploitation, taken in accordance with the National Plan of Action against Human Trafficking of 2004.

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

The Committee has noted the information provided by the Government in its 2005 and 2006 reports.

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Provisions concerning vagrancy. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to certain criminal provisions punishing vagrancy, begging and “other parasitic ways of life”. It noted the Government’s repeated indications in its reports that these provisions had not been applied in practice. The Committee has noted that a new Criminal Code which entered into force in 2000 does not contain provisions concerning vagrancy. However, the Committee has noted that vagrancy is still punished under section 307.1 of the Code of Administrative Offences, which provides that, under certain conditions, the persons concerned may be taken into administrative custody for a term of up to ten days. It has also noted the Government’s indications in its 2005 report that section 307.1 is applicable to persons who do not have a definite place of living nor means of subsistence, who do not have employment (without having an official status of unemployed) and who gain their income by mendicancy and pilfering. The Committee previously noted that, under section 1, paragraph 2, and section 3 of the Act on Employment of Population, unemployment cannot serve as grounds for instituting administrative, criminal or other proceedings against jobless persons who are registered in the State Employment Service, looking for a job and ready to work.

While taking due note of this information, the Committee recalls, referring also to the explanations in paragraph 88 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, that the possibility to impose penalties for mere refusal to work is contrary to the Convention. The Committee therefore hopes that the necessary measures will be taken with a view to clearly excluding from the legislation any possibility of compulsion to work, e.g. by limiting the scope of section 307.1 of the Code of Administrative Offences to persons engaging in illegal activities, so as to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee requests the Government to describe the criteria established for the application of this provision and to supply information on any legal proceedings which define or illustrate its scope.

Article 2(2)(a). Compulsory military service for non-military purposes. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 9(1) of the Act on the Status of Military Personnel 1991, under which military servicemen, during the period of their service, may be made to perform work or other tasks not related to military service, in accordance with the procedure laid down by the President of the Azerbaijan Republic. The Committee has noted the Government’s repeated statements in its reports, with reference to the Constitution of the Republic of Azerbaijan, that the armed forces may be called upon to fulfil duties which do not relate to their direct obligations, following the decision of Parliament, at the request of the President of the Republic, e.g. during the state of emergency. In its latest report, the Government confirms its previous indication that the abovementioned provisions have not been applied in practice.

The Committee recalls that, under Article 2(2)(a) of the Convention, work or service exacted by virtue of compulsory military service laws may only be excluded from the prohibition of forced labour if such work or service is of a purely military character. The Committee refers to the explanations in paragraphs 43–46 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, in which it pointed out that the provisions of the Convention relating to compulsory military service do not apply to career military servicemen and the Convention consequently is not opposed to the performance of non-military work by persons serving in the armed forces on a voluntary basis. But the use of conscripts for non‑military purposes may be permitted only in cases of emergency, as defined in the Convention. The Committee therefore hopes that measures will be taken, e.g. on the occasion of a possible future revision of the legislation, to indicate clearly that conscripts undergoing compulsory military service may be used only for purely military ends, with the exception of the emergency situations. Pending the revision, the Committee requests the Government to continue to describe the criteria for the application of the abovementioned national provisions and to provide any information on their application in practice, if and when such information becomes available.

Article 2(2)(c). Work of prisoners for private individuals, companies or associations. The Committee has noted the adoption of the Code on the Execution of Sentences, which entered into force on 1 September 2000. It has noted that under section 95.1 of the Code, every convicted person is under an obligation to work, such work being exacted from convicts either at enterprises and workshops of penitentiary institutions or on other enterprises, outside the penitentiary institution. The Committee previously noted that the former Correctional Labour Code (section 49) also provided for a possibility to use prison labour not only in the establishments belonging to the state executive penal system and in other state-owned enterprises, but also in enterprises based on other forms of ownership, on a contract basis.

As regards prison labour for private enterprises, the Committee recalls that Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention exempts from its provisions “any work or service exacted from any person as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law, provided that the said work or service is carried out under the supervision and control of a public authority and that the said person is not hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations”. While this Article strictly prohibits prisoners from being hired to or placed at the disposal of private undertakings, the Committee has pointed out in previous General Surveys, including its most recent General Survey of 2007, paragraphs 59–60, that, provided convicted prisoners voluntarily consent to such work without being subjected to pressure or menace, such work does not fall within the scope of the Convention. At the same time the Committee has indicated that, bearing in mind the captive circumstances of prisoners, there must be safeguards to ensure that their consent, is given freely and voluntarily. The Committee in paragraphs 114–122 of the General Survey of 2007, discussed the safeguards which include not only written formal consent but, further, that the most reliable indicator of voluntariness of the labour is if the work is performed under conditions which approximate a free labour relationship. Factors to be taken into account in such circumstances would include, for example, that there was a level of wages and social security provisions which approximated a free labour relationship.

As regards conditions of work of convicted persons, the Committee has noted that, under section 96 of the Code on the Execution of Sentences, hours of work and rest periods, as well as occupational safety and health, are governed by the general labour legislation. In virtue of sections 97 and 99 of the Code, convicted persons’ remuneration is also governed by the labour legislation; their monthly wages cannot be lower than legally established minimum wage, and deductions from wages on the basis of execution documents cannot exceed 75 per cent of their monthly earnings. Section 90 of the Code provides for the convicted persons’ social security rights, including old-age pension rights.

While noting that, under the above provisions, prisoners’ conditions of work may be considered as approximating those of a free labour relationship, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether and how the voluntary consent of the prisoners to work for private enterprises is obtained, such consent being free from the menace of any penalty, including the loss of rights or privileges. Please also supply sample copies of contracts concluded between a private company and a penitentiary institution, as well as of any contracts between prisoners and a company.

Article 2(2)(d). Legislation concerning emergency situations. The Committee requests the Government to supply, with its next reports, a copy of the Law on the State of Emergency, which was adopted and entered into force in 2004.

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25. Trafficking in persons for the purpose of exploitation. The Committee has noted with interest the adoption, in June 2005, of the Law on Fighting against Trafficking in Human Beings, as well as the National Plan of Action to Prevent and Combat Human Trafficking. It has noted that section 21 of the Law provides for criminal responsibility for the offences related to human trafficking, “in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Azerbaijan”. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the penal provisions (e.g. amendments to the Criminal Code) adopted for this purpose, as well as the information on the legal proceedings which might have been instituted under these provisions, indicating the penalties imposed on perpetrators. Please also provide, more generally, information on measures taken to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons for the purpose of exploitation, in accordance with the National Plan of Action referred to above.

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

The Committee notes that no report has been received from the Government. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the following matters raised in its previous direct request:

1. Article 1, paragraph 1, and Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention. In its earlier comments the Committee noted that section 215-1 of the Criminal Code provides for penal sanctions for vagrancy, begging and "other parasitic ways of life". It also noted that under section 1, paragraph 2, and section 3 of the Act on Employment of Population, unemployment cannot serve as grounds for instituting administrative, criminal or other proceedings against jobless persons who are registered in the State Employment Service, looking for a job and ready to work. The Government indicates in its report that section 215-1 of the Criminal Code has not been applied in practice during the reporting period.

The Committee takes due note of these indications. Inasmuch as unemployed persons are protected from proceedings under section 215-1 only where they are ready to work, the Committee, referring to paragraphs 45-48 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, must point out that the possibility to impose penalties for mere refusal to work is contrary to the Convention. Since section 215-1 does not appear to be applied in practice any more, the Committee hopes that the Government will be able to take the necessary measures with a view to clearly excluding from the legislation any possibility of compulsion to work, either by repealing section 215-1 of the Criminal Code or by limiting the scope of its provisions to persons engaging in illegal activities, so as to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention and with the indicated practice. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee requests the Government to describe the criteria established for the application of this provision of the Criminal Code and to supply copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.

2. Article 2, paragraph 2(a). The Committee previously noted that under section 9(1) of the Act on the Status of Military Personnel, 1991, military servicemen, during the period of their service, may be made to perform work or other tasks not related to military service, in accordance with the procedure laid down by the President of the Azerbaijan Republic. The Government stated in its previous report, with reference to the Act on Armed Forces of the Republic of Azerbaijan (section 2) and the Constitution of the Azerbaijan Republic (articles 95 and 109), that the armed forces may be called upon to fulfil duties which do not relate to their direct obligations, following the decision of Parliament, at the request of the President of the Republic. It indicates in its latest report that the abovementioned provisions have not been applied in practice during the reporting period. The Committee wishes to recall that, under the Convention, work or service exacted by virtue of compulsory military service laws may only be excluded from the prohibition of forced labour if such work or service is of a purely military character. Referring also to paragraphs 24-33 and 49-54 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, according to which the use of soldiers for non-military purposes may be permitted only in cases of emergency (such as natural disasters, or insurgency or other threats to national security), the Committee requests the Government to describe the criteria for the application of the abovementioned national provisions and to provide any information on their application in practice, if and when such information becomes available. Please also supply copies of provisions governing the procedure of calling the military to perform work not related to military service, to which reference is made in section 9(1) of the Act on the Status of Military Personnel, as well as copies of any other relevant texts.

3. Article 2, paragraph 2(c). The Committee has noted the information supplied by the Government concerning prison labour in Azerbaijan, including the information concerning conditions of work, remuneration and social security of working prisoners. It has noted, in particular, that section 49 of the Correctional Labour Code provides for an obligation of all prisoners to perform labour, such labour being performed either in the establishments belonging to the state executive penal system and in other state-owned enterprises or, on a contract basis, in enterprises based on other forms of ownership. As regards prison labour for this latter kind of enterprises, the Committee wishes to recall, referring to paragraphs 97-99 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, as well as to paragraphs 122-125 of its General Report submitted to the 86th Session of the ILC (1998) and to paragraphs 82-146 of its General Report submitted to the 89th Session of the ILC (2001), that work for private companies can be compatible with Article 2(2)(c) only where prisoners work in conditions approximating a free employment relationship, which necessarily requires the voluntary consent of the prisoner as well as further guarantees and safeguards covering the essential elements of a free employment relationship. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate whether and how the consent of the prisoners to work for private enterprises is obtained, and what are the wages, social security and other conditions of work of prisoners working for private enterprises. Please also supply copies of contracts concluded between a company and a prison, as well as of any contracts between prisoners and a company.

4. Article 2, paragraph 2(d). The Committee previously noted the constitutional and other legislative provisions exceptionally permitting the call up of labour during a state of emergency or martial law. It asked the Government whether guarantees are provided to ensure that the power to call up labour during the state of emergency is limited to what is strictly required by the exigencies of the situation and that work exacted in cases of emergency ceases as soon as the circumstances that endanger the population or its normal living conditions cease to exist. The Committee takes due note of the Government’s statement in its report that such guarantee is ensured by the high level of decision-making in emergency situations which is laid down by the Constitution and the Labour Code. Referring to the explanations provided in paragraphs 63-66 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, the Committee requests the Government to provide, in its future reports, information on any cases of application of the abovementioned provisions in practice, as well as on any measures taken, in the course of possible future revision of the legislation, to make it clear from the legislation itself that the power to exact labour is to be limited to what is strictly required in order to cope with circumstances endangering the population or its normal living conditions.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report contains no reply to previous comments. It hopes that the next report will include full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

1. Article 1, paragraph 1, and Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention. In its earlier comments the Committee noted that section 215-1 of the Criminal Code provides for penal sanctions for vagrancy, begging and "other parasitic ways of life". It also noted that under section 1, paragraph 2, and section 3 of the Act on Employment of Population, unemployment cannot serve as grounds for instituting administrative, criminal or other proceedings against jobless persons who are registered in the State Employment Service, looking for a job and ready to work. The Government indicates in its report that section 215-1 of the Criminal Code has not been applied in practice during the reporting period.

The Committee takes due note of these indications. Inasmuch as unemployed persons are protected from proceedings under section 215-1 only where they are ready to work, the Committee, referring to paragraphs 45-48 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, must point out that the possibility to impose penalties for mere refusal to work is contrary to the Convention. Since section 215-1 does not appear to be applied in practice any more, the Committee hopes that the Government will be able to take the necessary measures with a view to clearly excluding from the legislation any possibility of compulsion to work, either by repealing section 215-1 of the Criminal Code or by limiting the scope of its provisions to persons engaging in illegal activities, so as to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention and with the indicated practice. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee requests the Government to describe the criteria established for the application of this provision of the Criminal Code and to supply copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.

2. Article 2, paragraph 2(a). The Committee previously noted that under section 9(1) of the Act on the Status of Military Personnel, 1991, military servicemen, during the period of their service, may be made to perform work or other tasks not related to military service, in accordance with the procedure laid down by the President of the Azerbaijan Republic. The Government stated in its previous report, with reference to the Act on Armed Forces of the Republic of Azerbaijan (section 2) and the Constitution of the Azerbaijan Republic (articles 95 and 109), that the armed forces may be called upon to fulfil duties which do not relate to their direct obligations, following the decision of Parliament, at the request of the President of the Republic. It indicates in its latest report that the abovementioned provisions have not been applied in practice during the reporting period. The Committee wishes to recall that, under the Convention, work or service exacted by virtue of compulsory military service laws may only be excluded from the prohibition of forced labour if such work or service is of a purely military character. Referring also to paragraphs 24-33 and 49-54 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, according to which the use of soldiers for non-military purposes may be permitted only in cases of emergency (such as natural disasters, or insurgency or other threats to national security), the Committee requests the Government to describe the criteria for the application of the abovementioned national provisions and to provide any information on their application in practice, if and when such information becomes available. Please also supply copies of provisions governing the procedure of calling the military to perform work not related to military service, to which reference is made in section 9(1) of the Act on the Status of Military Personnel, as well as copies of any other relevant texts.

3. Article 2, paragraph 2(c). The Committee has noted the information supplied by the Government concerning prison labour in Azerbaijan, including the information concerning conditions of work, remuneration and social security of working prisoners. It has noted, in particular, that section 49 of the Correctional Labour Code provides for an obligation of all prisoners to perform labour, such labour being performed either in the establishments belonging to the state executive penal system and in other state-owned enterprises or, on a contract basis, in enterprises based on other forms of ownership. As regards prison labour for this latter kind of enterprises, the Committee wishes to recall, referring to paragraphs 97-99 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, as well as to paragraphs 122-125 of its General Report submitted to the 86th Session of the ILC (1998) and to paragraphs 82-146 of its General Report submitted to the 89th Session of the ILC (2001), that work for private companies can be compatible with Article 2(2)(c) only where prisoners work in conditions approximating a free employment relationship, which necessarily requires the voluntary consent of the prisoner as well as further guarantees and safeguards covering the essential elements of a free employment relationship. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate whether and how the consent of the prisoners to work for private enterprises is obtained, and what are the wages, social security and other conditions of work of prisoners working for private enterprises. Please also supply copies of contracts concluded between a company and a prison, as well as of any contracts between prisoners and a company.

4. Article 2, paragraph 2(d). The Committee previously noted the constitutional and other legislative provisions exceptionally permitting the call up of labour during a state of emergency or martial law. It asked the Government whether guarantees are provided to ensure that the power to call up labour during the state of emergency is limited to what is strictly required by the exigencies of the situation and that work exacted in cases of emergency ceases as soon as the circumstances that endanger the population or its normal living conditions cease to exist. The Committee takes due note of the Government’s statement in its report that such guarantee is ensured by the high level of decision-making in emergency situations which is laid down by the Constitution and the Labour Code. Referring to the explanations provided in paragraphs 63-66 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, the Committee requests the Government to provide, in its future reports, information on any cases of application of the abovementioned provisions in practice, as well as on any measures taken, in the course of possible future revision of the legislation, to make it clear from the legislation itself that the power to exact labour is to be limited to what is strictly required in order to cope with circumstances endangering the population or its normal living conditions.

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

The Committee notes that  no report has been received from the Government. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the following matters raised in its previous direct request:

1. Article 1, paragraph 1, and Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention. In its earlier comments the Committee noted that section 215-1 of the Criminal Code provides for penal sanctions for vagrancy, begging and "other parasitic ways of life". It also noted that under section 1, paragraph 2, and section 3 of the Act on Employment of Population, unemployment cannot serve as grounds for instituting administrative, criminal or other proceedings against jobless persons who are registered in the State Employment Service, looking for a job and ready to work. The Government indicates in its report that section 215-1 of the Criminal Code has not been applied in practice during the reporting period.

The Committee takes due note of these indications. Inasmuch as unemployed persons are protected from proceedings under section 215-1 only where they are ready to work, the Committee, referring to paragraphs 45-48 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, must point out that the possibility to impose penalties for mere refusal to work is contrary to the Convention. Since section 215-1 does not appear to be applied in practice any more, the Committee hopes that the Government will be able to take the necessary measures with a view to clearly excluding from the legislation any possibility of compulsion to work, either by repealing section 215-1 of the Criminal Code or by limiting the scope of its provisions to persons engaging in illegal activities, so as to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention and with the indicated practice. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee requests the Government to describe the criteria established for the application of this provision of the Criminal Code and to supply copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.

2. Article 2, paragraph 2(a). The Committee previously noted that under section 9(1) of the Act on the Status of Military Personnel, 1991, military servicemen, during the period of their service, may be made to perform work or other tasks not related to military service, in accordance with the procedure laid down by the President of the Azerbaijan Republic. The Government stated in its previous report, with reference to the Act on Armed Forces of the Republic of Azerbaijan (section 2) and the Constitution of the Azerbaijan Republic (articles 95 and 109), that the armed forces may be called upon to fulfil duties which do not relate to their direct obligations, following the decision of Parliament, at the request of the President of the Republic. It indicates in its latest report that the abovementioned provisions have not been applied in practice during the reporting period. The Committee wishes to recall that, under the Convention, work or service exacted by virtue of compulsory military service laws may only be excluded from the prohibition of forced labour if such work or service is of a purely military character. Referring also to paragraphs 24-33 and 49-54 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, according to which the use of soldiers for non-military purposes may be permitted only in cases of emergency (such as natural disasters, or insurgency or other threats to national security), the Committee requests the Government to describe the criteria for the application of the abovementioned national provisions and to provide any information on their application in practice, if and when such information becomes available. Please also supply copies of provisions governing the procedure of calling the military to perform work not related to military service, to which reference is made in section 9(1) of the Act on the Status of Military Personnel, as well as copies of any other relevant texts.

3. Article 2, paragraph 2(c). The Committee has noted the information supplied by the Government concerning prison labour in Azerbaijan, including the information concerning conditions of work, remuneration and social security of working prisoners. It has noted, in particular, that section 49 of the Correctional Labour Code provides for an obligation of all prisoners to perform labour, such labour being performed either in the establishments belonging to the state executive penal system and in other state-owned enterprises or, on a contract basis, in enterprises based on other forms of ownership. As regards prison labour for this latter kind of enterprises, the Committee wishes to recall, referring to paragraphs 97-99 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, as well as to paragraphs 122-125 of its General Report submitted to the 86th Session of the ILC (1998) and to paragraphs 82-146 of its General Report submitted to the 89th Session of the ILC (2001), that work for private companies can be compatible with Article 2(2)(c) only where prisoners work in conditions approximating a free employment relationship, which necessarily requires the voluntary consent of the prisoner as well as further guarantees and safeguards covering the essential elements of a free employment relationship. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate whether and how the consent of the prisoners to work for private enterprises is obtained, and what are the wages, social security and other conditions of work of prisoners working for private enterprises. Please also supply copies of contracts concluded between a company and a prison, as well as of any contracts between prisoners and a company.

4. Article 2, paragraph 2(d). The Committee previously noted the constitutional and other legislative provisions exceptionally permitting the call up of labour during a state of emergency or martial law. It asked the Government whether guarantees are provided to ensure that the power to call up labour during the state of emergency is limited to what is strictly required by the exigencies of the situation and that work exacted in cases of emergency ceases as soon as the circumstances that endanger the population or its normal living conditions cease to exist. The Committee takes due note of the Government’s statement in its report that such guarantee is ensured by the high level of decision-making in emergency situations which is laid down by the Constitution and the Labour Code. Referring to the explanations provided in paragraphs 63-66 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, the Committee requests the Government to provide, in its future reports, information on any cases of application of the abovementioned provisions in practice, as well as on any measures taken, in the course of possible future revision of the legislation, to make it clear from the legislation itself that the power to exact labour is to be limited to what is strictly required in order to cope with circumstances endangering the population or its normal living conditions.

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

The Committee has noted the information provided by the Government in reply to its earlier comments. It has also noted that the new Labour Code which entered into force in July 1999 contains a provision prohibiting the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour which is punishable in accordance with the law (section 17).

1. Article 1, paragraph 1, and Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention. In its earlier comments the Committee noted that section 215-1 of the Criminal Code provides for penal sanctions for vagrancy, begging and "other parasitic ways of life". It also noted that under section 1, paragraph 2, and section 3 of the Act on Employment of Population, unemployment cannot serve as grounds for instituting administrative, criminal or other proceedings against jobless persons who are registered in the State Employment Service, looking for a job and ready to work. The Government indicates in its report that section 215-1 of the Criminal Code has not been applied in practice during the reporting period.

The Committee takes due note of these indications. Inasmuch as unemployed persons are protected from proceedings under section 215-1 only where they are ready to work, the Committee, referring to paragraphs 45-48 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, must point out that the possibility to impose penalties for mere refusal to work is contrary to the Convention. Since section 215-1 does not appear to be applied in practice any more, the Committee hopes that the Government will be able to take the necessary measures with a view to clearly excluding from the legislation any possibility of compulsion to work, either by repealing section 215-1 of the Criminal Code or by limiting the scope of its provisions to persons engaging in illegal activities, so as to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention and with the indicated practice. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee requests the Government to describe the criteria established for the application of this provision of the Criminal Code and to supply copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.

2. Article 2, paragraph 2(a). The Committee previously noted that under section 9(1) of the Act on the Status of Military Personnel, 1991, military servicemen, during the period of their service, may be made to perform work or other tasks not related to military service, in accordance with the procedure laid down by the President of the Azerbaijan Republic. The Government stated in its previous report, with reference to the Act on Armed Forces of the Republic of Azerbaijan (section 2) and the Constitution of the Azerbaijan Republic (articles 95 and 109), that the armed forces may be called upon to fulfil duties which do not relate to their direct obligations, following the decision of Parliament, at the request of the President of the Republic. It indicates in its latest report that the abovementioned provisions have not been applied in practice during the reporting period. The Committee wishes to recall that, under the Convention, work or service exacted by virtue of compulsory military service laws may only be excluded from the prohibition of forced labour if such work or service is of a purely military character. Referring also to paragraphs 24-33 and 49-54 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, according to which the use of soldiers for non-military purposes may be permitted only in cases of emergency (such as natural disasters, or insurgency or other threats to national security), the Committee requests the Government to describe the criteria for the application of the abovementioned national provisions and to provide any information on their application in practice, if and when such information becomes available. Please also supply copies of provisions governing the procedure of calling the military to perform work not related to military service, to which reference is made in section 9(1) of the Act on the Status of Military Personnel, as well as copies of any other relevant texts.

3. Article 2, paragraph 2(c). The Committee has noted the information supplied by the Government concerning prison labour in Azerbaijan, including the information concerning conditions of work, remuneration and social security of working prisoners. It has noted, in particular, that section 49 of the Correctional Labour Code provides for an obligation of all prisoners to perform labour, such labour being performed either in the establishments belonging to the state executive penal system and in other state-owned enterprises or, on a contract basis, in enterprises based on other forms of ownership. As regards prison labour for this latter kind of enterprises, the Committee wishes to recall, referring to paragraphs 97-99 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, as well as to paragraphs 122-125 of its General Report submitted to the 86th Session of the ILC (1998) and to paragraphs 82-146 of its General Report submitted to the 89th Session of the ILC (2001), that work for private companies can be compatible with Article 2(2)(c) only where prisoners work in conditions approximating a free employment relationship, which necessarily requires the voluntary consent of the prisoner as well as further guarantees and safeguards covering the essential elements of a free employment relationship. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate whether and how the consent of the prisoners to work for private enterprises is obtained, and what are the wages, social security and other conditions of work of prisoners working for private enterprises. Please also supply copies of contracts concluded between a company and a prison, as well as of any contracts between prisoners and a company.

4. Article 2, paragraph 2(d). The Committee previously noted the constitutional and other legislative provisions exceptionally permitting the call up of labour during a state of emergency or martial law. It asked the Government whether guarantees are provided to ensure that the power to call up labour during the state of emergency is limited to what is strictly required by the exigencies of the situation and that work exacted in cases of emergency ceases as soon as the circumstances that endanger the population or its normal living conditions cease to exist. The Committee takes due note of the Government’s statement in its report that such guarantee is ensured by the high level of decision-making in emergency situations which is laid down by the Constitution and the Labour Code. Referring to the explanations provided in paragraphs 63-66 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, the Committee requests the Government to provide, in its future reports, information on any cases of application of the abovementioned provisions in practice, as well as on any measures taken, in the course of possible future revision of the legislation, to make it clear from the legislation itself that the power to exact labour is to be limited to what is strictly required in order to cope with circumstances endangering the population or its normal living conditions.

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

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous direct request. It notes that there is no provision governing the exaction of work or service (other than compulsory military service or work required in case of emergency) as normal civic obligations of the citizens or as minor communal services, within the meaning of Article 2, paragraph 2(b) and (e), of the Convention, and that such work or service is not exacted in practice. It also notes the text of the Act on Individual Labour Contracts, of 27 July 1996, supplied by the Government with its report. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide, in its next report, additional information on the following points.

1. Article 1, paragraph 1, and Article 2, paragraph 1. In its previous comments the Committee noted that section 215-1 of the Criminal Code provides for penal sanctions for vagrancy, begging and other parasitic ways of life. It notes that under section 1, paragraph 2, and section 3 of the Act on Employment of Population, unemployment cannot serve as grounds for instituting administrative, criminal or other proceedings against jobless persons who are registered in the State Employment Service, looking for a job and ready to work. Please indicate to whom section 215-1 is applied in practice.

2. Article 2, paragraph 2(a). In its previous comments the Committee noted that under section 9(1) of the Act on the Status of Military Personnel, 1991, military servicemen, during the period of their service, may be made to perform work or other tasks not related to military service, in accordance with the procedure laid down by the President of the Azerbaijan Republic. The Government confirms in its report, with reference to the Act on Armed Forces of the Republic of Azerbaijan (section 2) and the Constitution of the Azerbaijan Republic (articles 95 and 109), that the armed forces may be called upon to fulfil duties which do not relate to their direct obligations, following the decision of Parliament, at the request of the President of the Republic. The Committee recalls that work or service exacted by virtue of compulsory military service laws may only be excluded from the prohibition of forced labour if of a purely military character. It refers to the explanations provided in paragraphs 24-33 and 49-54 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, according to which the use of soldiers for non-military purposes may be permitted only in cases of emergency (such as natural disasters, or insurgency or other threats to national security), and the Convention does not affect the work of military engineers, pioneers or similar which is a part of military training or for the defence of the national territory. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the practical application of the above provisions.

3. Article 2, paragraph 2(c). The Committee notes the Government's statement in the report that prison labour in Azerbaijan is performed only in the establishments belonging to the state executive penal system. It would be grateful if the Government would indicate in its next report what guarantees are provided to ensure that convicted prisoners are not hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations.

4. Article 2, paragraph 2(d). In its previous comments the Committee noted that article 35, paragraph V, of the Constitution and section 8, paragraph 2, of the Act on Individual Labour Contracts provide for an exception from the general prohibition of forced labour during a state of emergency or martial law. It has noted the constitutional provisions concerning the declaration of a state of emergency or martial law (articles 111 and 112 of the Constitution). The Committee hopes that the Government will state, in its next report, what guarantees are provided to ensure that the power to call up labour during the state of emergency is limited to what is strictly required by the exigencies of the situation and that work exacted in case of emergency ceases as soon as the circumstances that endanger the population or its normal living conditions cease to exist.

5. Article 25. In its previous comments the Committee noted that section 8, paragraph 1, of the Act on Individual Labour Contracts provides that persons guilty of the forced exaction of labour from a worker are subject to legal responsibility in accordance with the established procedure. The Government refers in its report to section 136 of the Criminal Code which provides for penal sanctions for "substantial violation of labour legislation by an employer" and states that this applies in case of illegal exaction of forced labour. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would in its next report supply information on the application of this provision in practice, in relation to the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour, and on any penalties imposed.

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

The Committee notes with interest the information provided by the Government in its first and second reports on the application of the Convention. It would be grateful if the Government would supply, with its next report, a copy of a complete text of the Act on Individual Labour Contracts, of 27 July 1996, to which the Government referred in its latest report. Please also provide additional information on the following points:

Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Convention. The Committee notes that section 1, paragraph 2, of the Act on Employment, 1991, prohibits any form of compulsion to work and stipulates that the fact that a person is unemployed may not serve as grounds for instituting administrative, criminal or other proceedings against that person. The Committee also notes that section 215-1 of the Criminal Code provides for penal sanctions for vagrancy, begging and other parasitic ways of life. It would be grateful if the Government would provide, in its next report, information on the application in practice of this section of the Criminal Code in order to clarify the meaning of the expression "other parasitic ways of life" and to enable the Committee to evaluate its interpretation (for example, to see whether it is interpreted so as to cover all those who do not work regularly or refuse to work, or only persons engaged in unlawful activities) with a view to drawing a conclusion about its conformity to the Convention.

Article 2, paragraph 2(a). The Committee notes that article 35, paragraph V, of the Constitution excludes from the prohibition of forced labour work or service exacted in the course of compulsory military service. It also notes section 9(1) of the Act on the Status of Military Personnel, 1991, according to which military servicemen, during the period of their service, may be made to perform work or other tasks not related to military service, in accordance with the procedure laid down by the President of the Azerbaijan Republic. Recalling that, under this Article of the Convention, work or service exacted in virtue of compulsory military service laws may only be excluded from the prohibition of forced labour if such work or service is of a purely military character, the Committee asks the Government to indicate whether any provisions, by-laws or regulations, have been adopted under the above-mentioned section 9(1). In the affirmative, please supply copies, as well as information on the practical application of these provisions. It also would be grateful if the Government would indicate, in its next report, what guarantees are provided to ensure that services exacted during military service are used for purely military ends.

Article 2, paragraph 2(b). Please indicate any work or service (other than compulsory military service or work or service required in case of emergency) which may be exacted as normal civic obligations of the citizens of your country.

Article 2, paragraph 2(c). The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply, with its next report, copies of an up-to-date text of the Correctional Labour Code and the texts of any other laws and regulations in force concerning prison labour. Please indicate whether prison labour in the country must be in all cases performed in prisons or in enterprises belonging to the executive penal system or in other state-owned enterprises, under the supervision and control of a public authority, and what guarantees are provided to ensure that convicted prisoners are not hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations.

Article 2, paragraph 2(d). The Committee notes that article 35, paragraph V, of the Constitution and section 8, paragraph 2, of the Act on Individual Labour Contracts provide for an exception from the general prohibition of forced labour during a state of emergency or martial law. Please indicate whether any special legislation concerning a state of emergency has been adopted or is to be adopted under these provisions. Please also state what guarantees are provided to ensure that the power to call up labour during the state of emergency is limited to what is strictly required by the exigencies of the situation and that work exacted in case of emergency shall cease as soon as the circumstances that endanger the population or its normal living conditions no longer exist.

Article 2, paragraph 2(e). Please indicate whether minor communal services may be exacted, in the direct interest of the community, as normal civic obligations of its members and, if so, whether the members of the community or their direct representatives have the right to be consulted in regard to the need for such services.

Article 25. The Committee notes that section 8, paragraph 1, of the Act on Individual Labour Contracts provides that persons guilty of the forced exaction of labour from a worker are subject to legal responsibility in accordance with the established procedure. Please indicate whether the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour is punishable as a penal offence. Please also furnish information on any legal proceedings which have been instituted as a consequence of the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour and on any penalties imposed.