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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Article 1(d). Sanctions for participation in strikes. The Committee notes with satisfaction that the Employment Relations Act, 2008, has repealed the Industrial Relations Act, 1973, which contained provisions which punished the participation in strikes that violated compulsory arbitration procedures with sentences of imprisonment involving compulsory prison labour.

Article 1(c) and (d) of the Convention. Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act of 1986, under which certain breaches of discipline by seafarers (such as desertion, neglect or refusal to join the ship, absence without leave, neglect of duty) were punishable by imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour), and seafarers could be forcibly conveyed on board ship for the purpose of proceeding to sea. Referring to paragraph 180 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour, the Committee recalled that, in order to be compatible with the Convention, provisions imposing penalties of imprisonment on seafarers for breaches of labour discipline should be restricted to actions that endanger the safety of the ship or the life or health of persons on board.

The Committee notes the adoption of the Merchant Shipping Act, No. 26 of 2007, which has repealed the Merchant Shipping Act of 1986. The Committee notes that the Act no longer contains a separate provision on offenses by seafarers, nor does it contain any provision making explicit reference to such breaches of discipline by seafarers as desertion, neglect or refusal to join the ship, or absence without leave. It notes, however, that under section 217(16)(n), the Act continues to treat disobedience as a criminal offence, punishable by imprisonment (involving the imposition of compulsory labour), in penalizing a seafarer who refuses to obey the master’s order or neglects his duty.

The Committee hopes that the Government will take measures to further amend the Merchant Shipping Act, 2007, e.g., by limiting the scope of section 217(16)(n) to situations where the safety of the ship or the life or health of persons is endangered, so as to bring its provisions into conformity with the Convention, and that in its next report it will provide information about the progress made in this regard.

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

Article 1(c) and (d) of the Convention. Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. In comments made since 1992, the Committee has observed that, under sections 183(1) and 184(1) of the Merchant Shipping Act of 1986, certain breaches of discipline by seafarers (such as desertion, neglect or refusal to join the ship, absence without leave, neglect of duty) are punishable by imprisonment (under conditions involving the performance of compulsory labour), and that under section 183(1), (3) and (4), seafarers who are not citizens of Mauritius, and who commit such offences, may be forcibly conveyed on board ship for the purpose of proceeding to sea. Referring to paragraph 180 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour, the Committee recalls that, in order to be compatible with the Convention, provisions imposing penalties of imprisonment on seafarers for breaches of labour discipline should be restricted to actions that endanger the safety of the ship, or the life or health of persons on board. In its previous observation, the Committee reiterated its hope that the Merchant Shipping Act would be brought into conformity with the Convention in the near future, and that the Government would soon be able to indicate further progress achieved in this regard.

The Committee notes that, in its latest report, the Government refers to the Merchant Shipping Bill 2007, which aims to repeal and replace the Merchant Shipping Act of 1986. The Government states that the Bill “takes on board the observation” of the Committee. According to the Explanatory Memorandum of the Bill, it “makes better provision for the incorporation of the international conventions to which Mauritius is a party and of the protocols which apply to this country”. The Committee notes that the Bill no longer contains a separate provision on offences by seafarers, nor does it contain any provision making explicit reference to such breaches of discipline by seafarers as desertion, neglect or refusal to join the ship, or absence without leave. It further notes, however, that, under section 217(16)(n), the Bill continues to treat disobedience as a criminal offence, punishable by imprisonment (involving the imposition of compulsory labour), in penalizing a seafarer who “refuses to obey the master’s order, neglects his duty or assaults any member of the crew”. The Committee also notes the overly broad and vague wording of section 217(16)(j) of the Bill, which provides that “any person” (and therefore presumably any seafarer) who on board a ship so conducts himself that he is likely “to cause interference or annoyance to the other persons on board the ship” commits an offence punishable by imprisonment, and observes that it also raises problems of compatibility with the Convention.

The Committee therefore observes that the Merchant Shipping Bill 2007 continues to provide for criminal sanctions, involving imprisonment attended by the imposition of compulsory labour, for breaches of labour discipline that fall within the scope of activities protected under Article 1(c) of the Convention. The Committee trusts that the Government will take measures to further amend the Merchant Shipping Bill 2007, so as to ensure that its provisions are in conformity with the Convention, and that it will communicate a copy of the Bill as soon as it has been adopted into law.

Article 1(d). Sanctions for participation in strikes. The Committee has noted the observations in the communication of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (now the International Trade Union Confederation) dated 6 July 2006, as well as the Government’s reply to these comments in its communication of 18 October 2006. In its previous comments the Committee referred to the need to revise the Industrial Relations Act 1973 (IRA) in order to bring it into line with the Convention. In particular, it observed that, under sections 82 and 83 of the IRA, submission of any industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration is left to the discretion of the Minister; that the decision handed down following this procedure is enforceable (section 85) and any strike becomes unlawful (section 92); and that participation in a strike thus prohibited may be punished by imprisonment (section 102), a sanction which involves compulsory labour by virtue of section 35(1)(a) of the Reform Institutions Act. The Committee recalls, referring also to paragraphs 182–186 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour, that provisions for compulsory arbitration enforceable with sanctions that involve compulsory labour are incompatible with the Convention.

Referring to its comments addressed to the Government under Convention No. 87, likewise ratified by Mauritius, the Committee notes the adoption of the Employment Relations Act, 2008 (ERA) which, once proclaimed, will replace the Industrial Relations Act 1973 (IRA). However, the Committee notes that section 82(1)(b) of the ERA provides that, where the duration of a strike which is not unlawful is such that an industry or a service is likely to be seriously affected, or employment is threatened, the Prime Minister may apply to the Supreme Court for an order prohibiting the continuation of the strike. It notes further that section 82(3) of the ERA provides that, where the Supreme Court makes an order under subsection (1)(b), it shall refer the matter to the Tribunal for arbitration. The Committee considers that this amendment, which transfers authority from the Prime Minister to the Supreme Court, still allows for the imposition by the authorities of compulsory arbitration procedures, enforceable by penal sanctions against participants in strikes that involve the imposition of compulsory labour and, therefore, is incompatible with Convention No. 105.

The Committee trusts that measures will be taken in the near future to further amend section 82 of the Employment Relations Act 2008 so as to ensure, in conformity with the Convention, that no sanctions involving compulsory labour can be imposed for the mere fact of participating in a peaceful strike. The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report progress made with regard to the proclamation of the ERA and to communicate the complete text as soon as it enters into force.

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

1. Article 1(c) and (d) of the Convention. Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. The Committee previously noted that, under sections 183(1) and 184(1) of the Merchant Shipping Act of 1986, certain breaches of discipline by seafarers (such as desertion, neglect or refusal to join the ship, absence without leave, neglect of duty) are punishable by imprisonment (involving an obligation to perform labour), and that under section 183(1), (3) and (4), seafarers who are not citizens of Mauritius, and who commit such offences, may be forcibly conveyed on board ship for the purpose of proceeding to sea. Referring to paragraphs 110 to 125 of its General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour, the Committee recalled that, in order to be compatible with the Convention, the provisions mentioned above should be restricted to punishing breaches of labour discipline that endanger the safety of the ship, or the life or health of persons on board.

In its previous observation, the Committee noted the Government’s indications that it had undertaken to amend the Merchant Shipping Act and, in particular, sections 183 and 184, with the assistance of the International Maritime Organization, with a view to removing the possibility of having recourse to compulsory labour, in order to make the Act compatible with the Convention. The Committee notes that, in its latest report, the Government indicates that the Shipping Division of the Ministry of Shipping, Rodrigues and the Outer Islands, has submitted the Draft Merchant Shipping Bill to the State Law Office for vetting, and that necessary amendments to sections 183 and 184 of the Merchant Shipping Act 1986 are included in the Bill, in line with the requirements of the Convention, and that the Bill will be presented in Parliament for enactment in due course. The Committee reiterates its hope that the Merchant Shipping Act will be brought into conformity with the Convention in the near future, and that the Government will soon be able to indicate further progress achieved in this regard.

2. Article 1(d). Sanctions for participation in strikes. For many years in its comments, the Committee has observed that, under sections 82 and 83 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1973, submission of any industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration is left to the discretion of the Minister. The decision handed down following this procedure is enforceable (section 85) and any strike becomes unlawful (section 92). Finally, participation in a strike thus prohibited may be punished by imprisonment (section 102) involving compulsory labour by virtue of section 35(1)(a) of the Reform Institutions Act. The Committee observed that these provisions are incompatible with Article 1(d) of the Convention. It pointed out that, for provisions regarding compulsory arbitration, enforceable with sanctions involving compulsory labour, to be compatible with the Convention, their scope should be limited to essential services in the strict meaning of the term (namely those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population).

In its previous observation, the Committee noted the Government’s indications that it had undertaken to review the Industrial Relations Act; that to this effect a decision had been taken to set up a tripartite committee; and that, in the meantime, a technical committee chaired by the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Labour and Industrial Relations was considering amendments to be brought to the Act. The Committee notes the Government’s indications in its latest report that new draft legislation, the Employment and Labour Relations Bill, has been prepared and was presented for first reading in the National Assembly on 9 April 2005, but that following concerns and objections of both employers’ and workers’ organizations to some clauses of the Bill, the Cabinet of Ministers decided that certain portions of the Bill should be revisited and that the draft legislation would be introduced in the National Assembly after the general elections in July 2005. The Committee notes from the Government’s internet portal that, as of October 2005, the Bill has not been reintroduced in the National Assembly.

The Committee once again expresses the firm hope that the Industrial Relations Act will be amended in the near future and that the legislation will be brought into conformity with the Convention on this point. It asks the Government to provide, in its next report, information on further progress made in this regard.

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

The Committee has noted the Government’s reply to the communication of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) dated 24 October 2001.

1. Article 1(c) and (d) of the Convention. Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. The Committee previously noted that under sections 183(1) and 184(1) of the Merchant Shipping Act of 1986, certain breaches of discipline by seafarers (such as desertion, neglect or refusal to join the ship, absence without leave, neglect of duty) are punishable by imprisonment (involving an obligation to perform labour), and that under section 183(1), (3) and (4), seafarers who are not citizens of Mauritius, and who commit such offences, may be forcibly conveyed on board ship for the purpose of proceeding to sea.

Referring to paragraphs 110 to 125 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, the Committee recalled that, in order to be compatible with the Convention, the provisions mentioned above should be restricted to punishing breaches of labour discipline that endanger the safety of the ship or the life or health of persons on board.

The Committee has noted the Government’s indications in its 2003 report and in its reply to the communication of the ICFTU referred to above, that the Government has undertaken to amend the Merchant Shipping Act, and in particular sections 183 and 184, with the assistance of the International Maritime Organization, with a view to removing the possibility of having recourse to compulsory labour, in order to make the Act compatible with the Convention.

The Committee reiterates its hope that the Merchant Shipping Act will be brought into conformity with the Convention in the near future, and that the Government will soon be able to indicate the progress achieved in this regard.

2. Article 1(d). Sanctions for participation in strikes. For many years in its comments, the Committee has observed that under sections 82 and 83 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1973, submission of any industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration is left to the discretion of the minister. The decision handed down following this procedure is enforceable (section 85) and any strike becomes unlawful (section 92). Finally, participation in a strike thus prohibited may be punished by imprisonment (section 102) involving compulsory labour (section 35(1)(a) of the Reform Institutions Act). The Committee observed that these provisions are incompatible with Article 1(d) of the Convention. It pointed out that for provisions regarding compulsory arbitration, enforceable with sanctions involving compulsory labour, to be compatible with the Convention, their scope should be limited to essential services in the strict meaning of the term (namely those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population).

The Committee has noted the Government’s indications in its 2003 report and in its reply to the communication of the ICFTU referred to above, that the Government has undertaken to review the Industrial Relations Act, and that the Committee’s comments has been taken into consideration. The Government also indicates that, to this effect, decision has been taken to set up a tripartite committee, and that in the meantime, a technical committee chaired by the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Labour and Industrial Relations is considering amendments to be brought to the Act.

The Committee expresses the firm hope that the Industrial Relations Act will be amended in the near future and that the legislation will be brought into conformity with the Convention on this point. It asks the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the progress made in this regard.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report. The Committee has also taken note of a communication dated 24 October 2001 of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), submitting comments on the observance of the Convention in Mauritius, a copy of which was forwarded to the Government on 5 November 2001 for any comments it may wish to make on the matters raised therein.

Article 1(c) and (d) of the Convention

In its earlier comments the Committee noted that, under sections 183 and 184 of the Merchant Shipping Act of 1986, certain breaches of discipline by seamen (such as desertion, neglect or refusal to join the ship, absence without leave, neglect of duty) are punishable by imprisonment (involving an obligation to perform labour), and that under section 183(1), (3) and (4), seamen who are not citizens of Mauritius, and who commit such offences, may be forcibly conveyed on board ship for the purpose of proceeding to sea. With reference to paragraphs 110-125 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, the Committee has recalled that, in order to be compatible with the Convention, the provisions mentioned above should be restricted to punishing breaches of labour discipline that endanger the safety of the ship or the life or health of persons on board.

In its previous comments, the Committee has also observed that under sections 82 and 83 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1973, submission of any industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration is left to the discretion of the Minister. The decision handed down following this procedure is enforceable (section 85) and any strike becomes unlawful (section 92). Finally, participation in a strike thus prohibited may by punished by imprisonment (section 102) involving compulsory labour (section 35(1)(a) of the Reform Institutions Act). The Committee has observed that these provisions are incompatible with Article 1(d) of the Convention. It has pointed out that for provisions regarding compulsory arbitration, enforceable with sanctions involving compulsory labour, to be compatible with the Convention, their scope should be limited to essential services in the strict meaning of the term (namely those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population).

The Committee has also taken note of the comments of the ICFTU on these points, included in its communication of 24 October 2001.

The Committee notes the Government’s indications that sections 183 and 184 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1986, and section 102(1) of the Industrial Relations Act have not been applied during the period under review, and that the Government is not aware that they have ever been applied. The Committee therefore asks the Government to take the necessary measures for these national laws to be brought into conformity with the Convention, by the explicit repeal or amendment of those sections of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1986, and the Industrial Relations Act, 1973, referred to above, in order that there should be no continuing uncertainty as to their application and that the positive law reflect the practice which, according to the Government, is already in effect. The Committee hopes that in the very near future the legislation will be brought into conformity with the Convention, and that the Government will report on the action taken.

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

1. Article 1(c) and (d) of the Convention. In its earlier comments the Committee noted that under section 183(1)(a), (b), (c) and (e), read together with section 184(1) of the Merchant Shipping Act, No. 28 of 1986 (which entered into force on 15 January 1991 by virtue of Proclamation No. 1 of 1991), certain breaches of discipline by seamen (such as desertion, neglect or refusal to join the ship, absence without leave, neglect of duty) are punishable by imprisonment (involving an obligation to perform labour), and that under section 183(1), (3) and (4), seamen who are not citizens of Mauritius, and who commit such offences, may be conveyed on board ship for the purpose of proceeding to sea.

Referring to paragraphs 110-125 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, the Committee recalled that, in order to be compatible with the Convention, the provisions mentioned above should be restricted to punishing breaches of labour discipline that endanger the safety of the ship or the life or health of persons on board.

In its latest report, the Government indicates that it is proposed to amend the Merchant Shipping Act to make it compatible with Convention No. 105 and other international Conventions and that the Government is seeking assistance from the International Labour Office and the International Maritime Organization with a view to making necessary amendments to the Act, including sections 183 and 184.

The Committee hopes that the Government will be able to indicate, in the near future, that sections 183 and 184 of the Merchant Shipping Act have been amended, so as to ensure compliance with the Convention on this matter.

2. Article 1(d). In comments it has been making for many years, the Committee has observed that under sections 82 and 83 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1973, submission of any industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration is left to the discretion of the minister. The decision handed down following this procedure is enforceable (section 85) and any strike becomes unlawful (section 92). Finally, participation in a strike thus prohibited may be punished by imprisonment (section 102) involving compulsory labour (section 35(1)(a) of the Reform Institutions Act). The Committee observed that these provisions are incompatible with Article 1(d) of the Convention. It pointed out that for provisions regarding compulsory arbitration, enforceable with sanctions involving compulsory labour, to be compatible with the Convention, their scope should be limited to essential services in the strict meaning of the term (namely those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population).

The Committee notes the Government's indication in its report that a draft amendment bill, intended to revise the Industrial Relations Act, 1973, will be examined by the authorities concerned and consideration will be given to the observations made by the Committee. The Government adds that section 102(1) of the Industrial Relations Act has not been applied during the period under review.

Recalling that for a number of years the Government has indicated that no sanctions have been applied by virtue of the abovementioned provisions, referring also to bills intended to modify them, the Committee trusts that the Government will not fail to take, in the very near future, the necessary measures to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention on this point, and that it will supply information on the provisions adopted to this effect.

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

1. Article 1(c) and (d) of the Convention. In its previous comments the Committee noted that under section 183(1)(a), (b), (c) and (e), read together with section 184(1) of the Merchant Shipping Act, No. 28 of 1986 (which entered into force on 15 January 1991 by virtue of Proclamation No. 1 of 1991), certain breaches of discipline by seamen (such as desertion, neglect or refusal to join the ship, absence without leave, neglect of duty) are punishable by imprisonment (involving an obligation to perform labour), and that under section 183(1), (3) and (4), seamen who are not citizens of Mauritius, and who commit such offences, may be conveyed on board ship for the purpose of proceeding to sea.

Referring to paragraphs 110 to 125 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, the Committee recalled that in order to be compatible with the Convention the provisions mentioned above should restrict the imposition of sanctions to breaches of labour discipline endangering the safety of the ship or the life or health of persons on board.

In its latest report, the Government indicates that the Merchant Shipping Act has not yet been amended but that it is planned to bring it into conformity with the Convention as soon as possible.

The Committee hopes that the Government will shortly be able to indicate that sections 183 and 184 of the Merchant Shipping Act have been amended, thereby ensuring compliance with the Convention on this matter.

2. Article 1(d). In comments it has been making for many years, the Committee has observed that under sections 82 and 83 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1973, submission of any industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration is left to the discretion of the minister. The decision handed down after such a procedure is enforceable for the parties (section 85) and any strike becomes unlawful (section 92). Finally, participation in such a prohibited strike may be punished by imprisonment (section 102) involving compulsory labour (section 35(1)(a) of the Reform Institutions Act). The Committee observed that these provisions are incompatible with Article 1(d) of the Convention. It pointed out that for the provisions regarding compulsory arbitration, subject to sanctions involving compulsory labour, to be compatible with the Convention, their scope should be limited to essential services in the strict meaning of the term (namely those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population).

For many years, the Committee has noted the Government's statement to the effect that no sanctions have been applied by virtue of the above-mentioned provisions and referring to Bills intended to modify them. In its latest report, the Government reiterates this information.

The Committee requests the Government to take the measures necessary to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention on this matter and to provide information on the progress made in this direction.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 83rd ILC session (1996)

The Committee notes the Government's reports, and comments made by the Mauritius Employers' Federation.

1. Article 1(c) and (d) of the Convention. In its previous comments the Committee noted that under section 183(1)(a), (b), (c) and (e), read together with section 184(1) of the Merchant Shipping Act, No. 28 of 1986 (which came into operation on 15 January 1991 by virtue of Proclamation No. 1 of 1991), certain breaches of discipline by seamen (such as desertion, neglect or refusal to join the ship, absence without leave, neglect of duty) are punishable by imprisonment (involving an obligation to perform labour), and that under section 183(1), (3) and (4) seamen who are not citizens of Mauritius, and who commit such offences, may be conveyed on board ship for the purpose of proceeding to sea. Referring to paragraphs 110 to 125 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced or compulsory labour, the Committee recalled that the Convention does not protect seamen responsible for breaches of labour discipline endangering the safety of the ship or the life or health of persons on board. However the scope of the above-mentioned provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act is not limited to such cases.

The Committee notes with interest the Government's indication in its latest report that necessary legislative measures will be taken to amend sections 183 and 184 of the Merchant Shipping Act in order to comply with Article 1(c) of the Convention. The Committee looks forward to this.

2. Article 1(d). In comments made for many years, the Committee has referred to sections 82 and 83 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1973, which empower the minister to refer any industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration, enforceable by penalties involving compulsory labour. The Committee has pointed out that these provisions are incompatible with Article 1(d) of the Convention.

In its latest report, the Government indicates that the Trade Unions and Labour Relations Bill, which is intended to replace the Industrial Relations Act, contains in Clause 99 a provision excluding forced or compulsory labour from penalties for participation in strikes. Following the introduction of the Bill in the National Assembly, the Government started consultations with employers' and workers' organizations so as to reach consensus on the provision of the Bill. Consultations are not yet completed. At the opening of the 2nd session of the First National Assembly on 7 April 1995, the Government undertook to review the legal provisions on industrial relations.

The Committee takes due note of these indications. It notes that under section 99, subsection (3) of the Bill, any person who commits the offence of calling, instituting, organizing, carrying on or participating in an unlawful strike shall, on conviction, be liable to imprisonment, and that subsection (4) specifies that for the purposes of subsection (3), "imprisonment" means imprisonment without hard labour. This provision in subsection (4), if adopted, would not, however, remove section 99 of the Bill from the scope of Article 1(d) of the Convention. The Committee notes that, under sections 30(3) and 31 of the Prisons Ordinance, special provisions shall be made in the prison regulations concerning the employment of prisoners sentenced to imprisonment without hard labour. Such prisoners are divided into two divisions; the first including persons who have failed to satisfy a judgment debt, who have shown contempt of court, or have been sentenced to imprisonment for non-payment of a fine, the second including all other prisoners. Prisoners of the second division "shall be kept steadily employed and not allowed to idle their time away" (section 42 of the Prison Regulations). Prisoners of the first division and prisoners sentenced to imprisonment for non-payment of a fine "shall be employed within the prison at some light work such as cleaning the prison, picking coir or oakum or breaking small macadam" (section 43 of the Regulations). Labour shall be optional for prisoners detained pending inquiry or committed for trial (section 27 of the Prisons Ordinance). It would thus appear that except for prisoners in such detention (section 27 above), all prisoners are obliged to perform prison labour.

The Committee refers to the explanations provided in paragraphs 106 to 109 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, where it pointed out that the scope of the Convention is not restricted to hard labour and other particularly arduous or oppressive forms of labour, as distinct from ordinary prison labour. The Convention prohibits the use of "any form" of forced or compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, insofar as it is exacted in one of the five cases specified by the Convention.

The Committee therefore hopes that in the Trade Unions and Labour Relations Bill, either the penalty of imprisonment will be removed from section 99, or the freedom of workers to strike following normal procedures will be restored and any provisions for compulsory arbitration will be limited to industrial disputes in services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population and/or, within the public service, be limited in scope to public servants exercising authority in the name of the State.

The Committee hopes that the Government will initiate the necessary action and that it will soon report on the measures taken.

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

In its previous comments the Committee noted that under section 183(1)(a), (b), (c) and (e), read together with section 184(1) of the Merchant Shipping Act, No. 28 of 1986 (which came into operation on 15 January 1991 by virtue of Proclamation No. 1 of 1991), certain breaches of discipline by seamen (such as desertion, neglect or refusal to join the ship, absence without leave, neglect of duty) are punishable by imprisonment (involving an obligation to perform labour), and that under section 183(1), (3) and (4) seamen who are not citizens of Mauritius, and who commit such offences, may be conveyed on board ship for the purpose of proceeding to sea.

The Committee noted that these provisions repealed sections 221 to 224 and 225(a), (b), (c) and (e) of the United Kingdom Merchant Shipping Act, 1894 applicable to Mauritius, on which the Committee had been commenting for numerous years. The Committee observed however that under the provisions of the 1986 Act, breaches of discipline continued to be punishable by sentences of imprisonment (involving an obligation to work) even where the offence does not endanger the safety of the ship or the life or health of persons, and seamen may be forcibly conveyed on board ship to perform their duties.

The Committee notes the Government's information in its report, that the provisions under sections 183 and 184 are meant for extreme cases where seamen repeatedly indulge in these offences, that in practice no breaches have been noticed and that each offence would be considered by a disciplinary committee to be established under the Seamen's Act.

Referring to paragraphs 110 to 125 of its 1979 General Survey on Forced or Compulsory Labour, the Committee recalls that the Convention does not protect seamen responsible for breaches of labour discipline endangering the safety of the ship or the life or health of persons on board. However the scope of the above-mentioned provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act is not limited to such cases.

The Committee hopes that the Government will provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to bring the 1986 Merchant Shipping Act into conformity with the Convention on this point.

Article 1(d). In comments made for many years, the Committee has referred to sections 82 and 83 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1973, which empower the minister to refer any industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration, enforceable by penalties involving compulsory labour. The Committee has pointed out that these provisions are incompatible with Article 1(d) of the Convention.

The Committee notes with interest the Government's information in its report that the Special Law Review Committee set up to review the Industrial Relations Act has submitted its report. The Committee hopes that in examining the report the Government will take due consideration of the provisions of the Convention which prohibit the use of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for having participated in strikes. Any compulsory arbitration enforceable with penalties involving compulsory labour, must be limited to services whose interruption is likely to endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee hopes that the Government will report on the measures adopted to ensure the observance of the Convention in this regard.

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

Article 1(c) and (d) of the Convention. In earlier comments, the Committee referred to sections 221 to 224 and 225(a), (b), (c) and (e) of the United Kingdom Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, applicable in Mauritius by virtue of section 3(10) of the Merchant Shipping Ordinance, 1911 (Cap. 346), under which seamen may be forcibly conveyed on board ship to perform their duties and punished with a sentence of imprisonment (involving the obligation to work) for breaches of discipline, even where the offence does not endanger the safety of the ship or the life or health of persons. The Committee had noted the Government's indication that the Merchant Shipping Act, 1986, had been enacted but had not yet been proclaimed and that provision was made in the new Act to comply with the Convention and to repeal the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894.

The Committee notes that the Merchant Shipping Act, No. 28 of 28 July 1986, came into operation on 15 January 1991 by virtue of Proclamation No. 1 of 1991.

The Committee has taken note of the text of the new Act communicated by the Government together with its report.

The Committee notes that under section 183(1) (a), (b), (c) and (e) read together with section 184(1) of the Act certain breaches of discipline by seamen (such as desertion, neglect or refusal to join the ship, absence without leave, neglect of duty) are punishable by imprisonment (involving an obligation to perform labour), and that under section 183(1), (3) and (4) seamen who are not citizens of Mauritius, and who commit such offences, may be conveyed on board ship for the purpose of proceeding to sea.

The Committee notes with regret that the new Merchant Shipping Act has introduced no progress as to the substance of the provisions on which the Committee has been commenting for numerous years, that breaches of discipline continue to be punishable by sentences of imprisonment (involving an obligation to work) even where the offence does not endanger the safety of the ship or the life or health of persons, and that seamen may be forcibly conveyed on board ship to perform their duties.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure the observance of the Convention.

Article 1(d). In comments made for many years, the Committee has referred to sections 82 and 83 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1973, which empower the minister to refer any industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration, enforceable by penalties involving compulsory labour. The Committee has pointed out that these provisions are incompatible with Article 1(d) of the Convention.

The Committee notes the Government's indication in its report that a special law review committee, set up to examine the aforementioned Act, has not yet finalised this review.

Referring also to previously reported steps taken to bring the industrial relations legislation into conformity with the Convention, the Committee expresses once more the hope that action will soon be completed to ensure that compulsory arbitration enforceable with penalties involving compulsory labour is limited to services whose interruption is likely to endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population.

[The Government is requested to report in detail for the period ending 30 June 1992.]

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

1. Article 1(c) and (d) of the Convention. In earlier comments, the Committee referred to sections 221 to 224 and 225(a), (b), (c) and (e) of the United Kingdom Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, applicable in Mauritius by virtue of section 3(10) of the Merchant Shipping Ordinance, 1911 (Cap. 346), under which seamen may be forcibly conveyed on board ship to perform their duties and punished with a sentence of imprisonment (involving the obligation to work) for breaches of discipline, even where the offence has not endangered the safety of persons or the ship. The Committee had noted the Government's indication that the Merchant Shipping Act, 1986, had been enacted but had not yet been proclaimed and that provision was made in the new Act to comply with the Convention and to repeal the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894. The Committee notes the Government's information in its latest report that the mechanism for the implementation of the 1986 Merchant Shipping Act was being put into place and that the Act was eventually to be promulgated in December 1990. The Committee trusts that the Merchant Shipping Act, 1986, will ensure the observance of the Convention in maritime disciplinary law and hopes that the Government will soon be in a position to report its entry into force and to supply a copy of the Act as well as of the proclamation bringing it into force.

2. Article 1(d). In comments made for many years, the Committee has referred to sections 82 and 83 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1973, which empower the minister to refer any industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration, enforceable by penalties involving compulsory labour. The Committee has pointed out that these provisions are incompatible with Article 1(d) of the Convention.

The Committee notes the Government's information in its report that a special law review committee was set up to review the aforementioned Act.

Referring also to previously reported steps taken to bring the industrial relations legislation into conformity with the Convention, the Committee expresses once more the hope that action will soon be completed to ensure that compulsory arbitration enforceable with penalties involving compulsory labour is limited to services whose interruption is likely to endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population.

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

1. Article 1(c) and (d) of the Convention. In earlier comments, the Committee has referred to sections 221 to 224 and 225(a), (b), (c) and (e) of the United Kingdom Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, applicable in Mauritius by virtue of section 3(10) of the Merchant Shipping Ordinance, 1911 (Cap. 346), under which seamen may be forcibly conveyed on board ship to perform their duties and punished with a sentence of imprisonment (involving the obligation to work) for breaches of discipline, even where the offence has not endangered the safety of persons or the ship. The Committee notes with interest the Government's indication in its latest report that the Merchant Shipping Act, 1986, has been enacted but has not yet been proclaimed and that provision has been made in the new Act to comply with the Convention and to repeal the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894. The Committee trusts that the Merchant Shipping Act, 1986, will ensure the observance of the Convention in maritime disciplinary law and hopes that the Government will soon be in a position to report its entry into force and to supply a copy of the Act as well as of the proclamation bringing it into force.

2. Article 1(d). In comments made for many years, the Committee has referred to sections 82 and 83 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1973, which empower the minister to refer any industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration, enforceable by penalties involving compulsory labour. The Committee has pointed out that these provisions are incompatible with Article 1(d) of the Convention. It notes that the Government gives no information in its most recent report with regard to measures taken or under consideration to bring this legislation into conformity with the Convention. It recalls the statement by the Government in its report for the period 1 July 1983 to 30 June 1985 that consideration was being given to measures to be taken and the statement in its report for the period 1979-82 that the procedure for the repeal of the Industrial Relations Act, 1973, had been set in motion and that a parliamentary committee was to draft completely new legislation on industrial relations after hearing the proposals of the employers' and workers' organisations.

The Committee hopes that previously reported steps taken to bring the industrial relations legislation into conformity with the Convention will proceed and that action will soon be completed to ensure that compulsory arbitration enforceable with penalties involving compulsory labour is limited to services whose interruption is likely to endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. [The Government is asked to report in detail for the period ending 30 June 1990.]