All Comments

Home Page | Français | Español |

ILO is a United Nations Agency

RSS Feed | Newsroom | Contact us

NORMLEX

Information System on International Labour Standards

Instruments
Key documents
Ratification of ILO Conventions
Supervising the application of International Labour Standards: Supervision by country; Search comments by the supervisory bodies; Complaint procedures; Freedom of association cases; Representations (Art. 24); Commission of Inquiry (Art. 26)
Regular reporting
Country profiles
Comparatives
Maritime Labour Convention (2006)

MLC, 2006

NATLEX *new look*
National Legislation on Labour and Social Rights

LEGOSH
Global database on occupational safety and health legislation

EPLex
Employment protection legislation database

Compendium of court decisions

NORMLEX Home > Country profiles > > Comments > All Comments

Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Malawi (Ratification: 1999)

Display in: French - Spanish

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

The Committee notes the observations of the Teachers Union of Malawi (TUM) and the Private Schools Employees Union of Malawi (PSEUM), received on 3 September 2021, concerning matters examined under this comment, and alleging violations of trade union rights in practice. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill was abandoned and new plans are being put in place to commence fresh consultations on the review of the Labour Relations Act (LRA). The Government states that the amendment of the LRA will ensure that its provisions are in conformity with the Convention.

Article 3 of the Convention. The right of organizations to freely organize their activities and formulate their programmes. The Committee notes the TUM’s and PSEUM’s indication that the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill approved by the Parliament in July 2021 established a list of essential services to which the right to strike and lockdown does not apply. The Committee notes that the Government reiterates in general that the LRA provides the right to workers and employers organizations to freely organize their activities and formulate their programmes without interference. The Committee recalls its expectation that the list of essential services set out in the LRA will be limited to those services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole, or part, of the population, and that adequate protection will be afforded to the affected workers to compensate for the restrictions imposed on their freedom of action, and it requests the list of the essential services included in the LRA bill approved by Parliament in July 2021.

Article 4. Dissolution or suspension of organizations by administrative authority. The Committee had previously referred to the need to amend section 18(4) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill, which provided that if an organization failed to comply with the provisions of subsection (1) (which required an organization to annually submit audited financial statements, a list of the names and postal addresses of its officers, and its number of members) after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so, the Registrar could suspend and even cancel the registration and certificate of an organization (pursuant to sections 18(4) and (5)). The Committee had noted, in this connection, that section 18(6) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill provided that an organization could appeal against a decision of the Registrar to suspend or cancel its registration and certificate of registration. The Committee had requested the Government to indicate: (i) whether an organization’s appeal had the effect of suspending the administrative decision, pending the issuance of a final decision by the judiciary; and (ii) whether the judiciary, upon hearing an appeal, was able to deal with the substance of the case and to decide whether or not the provisions, pursuant to which the administrative measures in question were taken, constituted a violation of the rights guaranteed by the Convention. Regretting not having received any information in this regard, the Committee reiterates its request and considers that in the event that either of these judicial safeguards against dissolution is not provided for, the Government should take the necessary measures, including through the LRA under review, to ensure that the measures of dissolution of trade union organizations may only occur in extremely serious cases and following a judicial decision.

The Committee once again expresses its firm expectation that the Government will take the necessary measures to ensure that the revised LRA will be in full conformity with the Convention. The Committee recalls that the Government may avail itself of the technical assistance of the ILO and requests it to provide information on any development, including a copy of any adopted text.

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

The Committee recalls that for a number of years, it has been commenting on the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill 2006 (LRA Bill) and that its previous comments referred to the following points.

Article 3 of the Convention. The right of organizations to freely organize their activities and formulate their programmes. In previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to provide information on any development concerning the establishment and composition of the subcommittee of the Tripartite Labour Advisory Council and the advancement of its work on the review of the final version of the LRA Bill, notably with regard to the establishment of the list of essential services. The Committee expected that the list of essential services would be limited to those services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole, or part, of the population, and that adequate protection will be afforded to the affected workers to compensate for the restrictions imposed on their freedom of action.

Article 4. Dissolution or suspension of organizations by administrative authority. The Committee had previously referred to the need to amend section 18(4) of the LRA Bill which provides that if an organization fails to comply with the provisions of subsection (1) (which require an organization to annually submit audited financial statements, a list of the names and postal addresses of its officers, and its number of members) after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so, the Registrar may suspend and even cancel the registration and certificate of an organization. The Committee also observed that section 18(4) and (5) provides that the Registrar may suspend and even cancel the registration and certificate of an organization which fails to comply with the requirements of section 18(1) and had noted, in this connection, that section 18(6) of the LRA Bill provides that an organization may appeal against a decision of the Registrar to suspend or cancel its registration and certificate of registration. The Committee had requested the Government to indicate: (i) whether an organization’s appeal has the effect of suspending the administrative decision, pending the issuance of a final decision by the judiciary; and (ii) whether the judiciary, upon hearing an appeal, is able to deal with the substance of the case and to decide whether or not the provisions, pursuant to which the administrative measures in question were taken, constitute a violation of the rights guaranteed by the Convention. The Committee had considered that in the event that either of these judicial safeguards against dissolution is not provided for, the Government should take the necessary measures to amend section 18(4), (5) and (6) of the LRA Bill so that measures of dissolution of trade union organizations only occur in extremely serious cases and following a judicial decision.

The Committee notes with regret that in its very brief report, the Government once again indicates that the LRA Bill is yet to be amended. The Committee therefore reiterates its previous request and expects that the Government will take the necessary measures to ensure that the LRA Bill, as amended, is in conformity with the Convention, and asks the Government to transmit a final version thereof.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It notes nonetheless the Government’s response to the 2014 observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) which refer to the matters examined by the Committee.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to freely organize their activities and formulate their programmes. In its previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to provide information on any development concerning the establishment and composition of the subcommittee of the Tripartite Labour Advisory Council and the advancement of its work on the review of the final version of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill (LRA Bill), notably with regard to the establishment of the list of essential services, as well as to transmit the final version of the LRA Bill. The Committee notes that in its reply to the ITUC’s observations, the Government indicates that, preliminary work being concluded, the process of the drawing up of a list of essential services is now under way, and that the social partners have been asked to consult their constituents, after which a tripartite meeting will be convened to agree on the list. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the outcome of the tripartite meeting and expects that the list of essential services will be limited to those services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population, and that adequate protection will be afforded to the affected workers so as to compensate for the restrictions imposed on their freedom of action. The Committee requests the Government to transmit the final version of the LRA Bill.

Article 4. Dissolution or suspension of organizations by administrative authority. The Committee previously referred more than once to the need to amend section 18(4) of the LRA Bill which provides that if an organization fails to comply with the provisions of subsection (1) (which require an organization to annually submit audited financial statements, a list of the names and postal addresses of its officers, and its number of members) after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so, the Registrar may suspend and even cancel the registration and certificate of an organization. The Committee had furthermore noted that section 18(4) and (5) provides that the Registrar may suspend and even cancel the registration and certificate of an organization which fails to comply with the requirements of section 18(1) and had noted, in this connection, that section 18(6) of the LRA Bill provides that an organization may appeal against a decision of the Registrar to suspend or cancel its registration and certificate of registration. The Committee had requested the Government to indicate: (i) whether an organization’s appeal has the effect of suspending the administrative decision, pending the issuance of a final decision by the judiciary; and (ii) whether the judiciary, upon hearing an appeal, is able to deal with the substance of the case and to decide whether or not the provisions pursuant to which the administrative measures in question were taken constitute a violation of the rights guaranteed by the Convention. The Committee had considered that in the event that either of these judicial safeguards against dissolution is not provided for, the Government should take the necessary measures to amend section 18(4), (5) and (6) of the LRA Bill so that measures of dissolution of trade union organizations only occur in extremely serious cases and following a judicial decision. In the absence of any new information, the Committee reiterates its previous request and expects that the Government will take whatever measures are necessary to bring section 18(4), (5) and (6) into conformity with the Convention.

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

Article 2 of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee had referred to the need to amend section 18(4) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill, 2006 (LRA), which provides that if an organization fails to comply with the provisions of subsection (1) (which require an organization to annually submit audited financial statements, a list of the names and postal addresses of its officers, and its number of members) after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so, the Registrar may suspend and even cancel the registration and certificate of an organization. The Committee had recalled that measures of suspension or dissolution of trade union organizations by the administrative authority constitute serious infringements to the principles of freedom of association and should only occur in extremely serious cases and following a judicial decision. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the final version of the LRA is not yet ready and that the review process is expected to be revived in 2014. The Committee trusts that the Government will take into consideration the abovementioned principle with respect to measures of suspension or dissolution in order to amend section 18(4), (5) and (6) of the LRA in the framework of its review.

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

The Committee takes note of the observations provided by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication received on 1 September 2014 and requests the Government to provide its comments thereon. The Committee also takes note of the observations provided by the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) in a communication received on 1 September 2014.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to freely organize their activities and formulate their programmes. In its previous observation, the Committee requested the Government to transmit the final version of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill, 2006 (LRA), as well as detailed information on any development concerning the establishment of the subcommittee of the Tripartite Labour Advisory Council (mandated to determine a list of essential services under the LRA) and the start of its work. The Committee notes that in its report the Government indicates that the final version of the LRA is not yet ready and that the review process is expected to be revived in 2014. The Government further indicates that the subcommittee of the Tripartite Labour Advisory Council is not yet established and will be hopefully established soon. The Committee trusts that the subcommittee of the Tripartite Labour Advisory Council will be established in the near future and that it will be in a position to start its work concerning the review of the final version of the LRA. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any development in this regard.

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

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report contains no reply to its 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:

Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee previously referred to the need to amend sections 18(4) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill, 2006 (LRA) which provides that if an organization fails to comply with the provisions of subsection (1) (which require an organization to annually submit audited financial statements, a list of the names and postal addresses of its officers, and its number of members) after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so, the Registrar may suspend and even cancel the registration and certificate of an organization. The Committee furthermore notes that sections 18(4) and (5) provide that the Registrar may suspend and even cancel the registration and certificate of an organization which fails to comply with the requirements of section 18(1). In its last comments, the Committee had noted, in this connection, that section 18(6) of the LRA (2006) provides that an organization may appeal against a decision of the Registrar to suspend or cancel its registration and certificate of registration. Furthermore, the Committee had noted the Government’s indication that the LRA (2006) has been revised so as to allow unions to appeal decisions of the Registrar to cancel their registration. The Committee recalls that measures of suspension or dissolution by the administrative authority constitute serious infringements to the principles of freedom of association; measures of dissolution of trade union organizations should only occur in extremely serious cases and following a judicial decision. In these circumstances, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate: (i) whether an organization’s appeal has the effect of suspending the administrative decision, pending the issuance of a final decision by the judiciary; and (ii) whether the judiciary, upon hearing an appeal, is able to deal with the substance of the case to enable them to decide whether or not the provisions pursuant to which the administrative measures in question were taken constitute a violation of the rights guaranteed by the Convention. In the event that either of these judicial safeguards against dissolution are not provided for, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 18(4), (5) and (6) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill 2006 so as to bring it into full conformity with the abovementioned principle.

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

The Committee notes the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), dated 4 August 2011.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to freely organize their activities and formulate their programmes. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that under sections 45(3) and 47 of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill, 2006 (LRA 2006), in cases of strikes or lockouts, the parties may at any time apply to the Industrial Relations Court for a determination as to whether a threatened or actual strike or lockout involves an essential service. In this respect, the Government indicated that the social partners considered that a clear list of what should be considered an essential service under the Labour Relations Act (LRA) should be established and that a provision had been included in the LRA 2006 for the establishment of a subcommittee of the Tripartite Labour Advisory Council mandated to determine a list of essential services under the LRA. The Committee requested the Government to provide information on any development concerning the establishment and composition of the subcommittee and the advancement of its work. The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that consultations with the social partners regarding the establishment of the subcommittee and the start of its work are in progress. The Committee requests the Government to transmit the final version of the LRA 2006 with its next report as well as detailed information on any development concerning the establishment of the subcommittee of the Tripartite Labour Advisory Council and the start of its work.

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

Article 2 of the Convention. Previously, the Committee had referred to the need to amend section 18(4) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill, 2006, which provides that if an organization fails to comply with the provisions of subsection (1) (which require an organization to annually submit audited financial statements, a list of the names and postal addresses of its officers, and its number of members) after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so, the Registrar may suspend and even cancel the registration and certificate of an organization. In its last comments, the Committee had noted, in this connection, that section 18(6) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill provides that an organization may appeal against a decision of the Registrar to suspend or cancel its registration and certificate of registration. Furthermore, the Committee had noted the Government’s indication that the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill has been revised so as to allow unions to appeal decisions of the Registrar to cancel their registration. The Committee notes that the Government does not refer to this issue in its last report. In these circumstances, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate: (i) whether an organization’s appeal has the effect of suspending the administrative decision, pending the issuance of a final decision by the judiciary; and (ii) whether the judiciary, upon hearing an appeal, is able to deal with the substance of the case to enable them to decide whether or not the provisions pursuant to which the administrative measures in question were taken constitute a violation of the rights guaranteed by the Convention. In the event that either of these judicial safeguards against dissolution are not provided for, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 18(6) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill so as to bring it into full conformity with the abovementioned principle.

The Committee once again requests the Government to transmit the final version of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill with its next report.

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

The Committee notes the Government replies to the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) dated 26 August 2009. The Committee also notes the comments submitted by ITUC dated 24 August 2010 that mainly refer to matters previously raised by the Committee.

In its previous comments, the Committee, noting that sections 45(3) and 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act empower the parties concerned to apply to the Industrial Relations Court for a determination as to whether a particular strike involves an essential service, had requested the Government to provide information on any strike declared illegal and the reasons therefor, as well as on any decisions rendered by the Industrial Relations Court under these sections of the Labour Relations Act. The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that: (i) no strikes have been declared illegal on the basis of essential services; (ii) no request for determination of an essential service has been made before the Industrial Relations Court; and (iii) the social partners considered that a clear list of what should be considered an essential service under the Labour Relations Act should be established; in this regard, a provision had been included in the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill for the establishment of a subcommittee of the Tripartite Labour Advisory Council whose purpose is to determine a list of what should be considered an essential service under the Labour Relations Act. In these circumstances, the Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report of any development concerning the establishment of the subcommittee and the advancement of its work.

A request concerning other points is being addressed directly to the Government.

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

Article 2 of the Convention. Previously, the Committee had referred to the need to amend section 18(4) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill, 2006, which provides that if an organization fails to comply with the provisions of subsection (1) (which require an organization to annually submit audited financial statements, a list of the names and postal addresses of its officers, and its number of members) after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so, the Registrar may suspend and even cancel the registration and certificate of an organization. The Committee notes, in this connection, that section 18(6) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill provides that an organization may appeal against a decision of the Registrar to suspend or cancel its registration and certificate of registration. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill has been revised so as to allow unions to appeal decisions of the Registrar to cancel their registration. In these circumstances, the Committee requests the Government to indicate: (1) whether an organization’s appeal has the effect of suspending the administrative decision, pending the issuance of a final decision by the judiciary; and (2) whether the judiciary, upon hearing an appeal, is able to deal with the substance of the case to enable them to decide whether or not the provisions pursuant to which the administrative measures in question were taken constitute a violation of the rights guaranteed by the Convention. In the event that either of these judicial safeguards against dissolution are not provided for, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 18(6) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill so as to bring it into full conformity with the abovementioned principle.

Article 3. The Committee had previously referred to the need to amend section 49(2) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill, which provides that an employer may fairly dismiss an employee on grounds of operational requirements, notwithstanding that the operational requirements resulted from a strike undertaken in conformity with the Labour Relations Act. In this regard, the Committee notes with interest that the Government indicates that section 49(2) of the Bill has been deleted.

The Committee requests the Government to transmit the final version of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill with its next report.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report and its reply to the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) dated 29 August 2008. The ITUC’s comments mainly refer to matters previously raised by the Committee on the right to strike.

In its previous comments, the Committee, noting that sections 45(3) and 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act empower the parties concerned to apply to the Industrial Relations Court for a determination as to whether a particular strike involves an essential service, had requested the Government to provide information on any strike declared illegal and the reasons therefore, as well as on any decisions rendered by the Industrial Relations Court under these sections of the Labour Relations Act. The Government indicates in this regard that the procedures set out in the Labour Relations Act concerning strike action are often not followed by unions, which leads to many strikes being declared illegal, and adds that, with international assistance, it has intensified tripartite discussion on, among other things, the issue of illegal strikes. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on any strike declared illegal and the reasons therefore, as well as on any decisions rendered by the Industrial Relations Court, under sections 45(3) and 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act.

A request concerning other points is being addressed directly to the Government.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report. It observes, however, that it does not reply to the points raised in its previous comments. In these circumstances the Committee reiterates its previous comments.

Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee noted that section 18(4) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill, 2006, provides that, if an organization fails to comply with the provisions of subsection (1) (on submission of financial and membership information to the registrar) after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so, the registrar may suspend and even cancel the registration and certificate of an organization. The Committee recalls that measures of suspension or dissolution by the administrative authority constitute serious infringements to the principles of freedom of association. Measures of dissolution of trade union organizations should only occur in extremely serious cases and following a judicial decision so that the right to a defence is fully guaranteed.

Article 3. The Committee also noted that section 49(1) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill, 2006, provides for the prohibition of the employer from taking disciplinary action or dismissing an employee for participating in a strike in conformity with this Bill. However, section 49(2) of this Bill provides that an employer may fairly dismiss an employee on grounds of operational requirements, notwithstanding that the operational requirements resulted from a strike in conformity with this Act. The Committee recalls once again that although the inclusion of dismissal on grounds of operational requirements is generally acceptable, in the specific situation of a strike this could lead to those involved in the strike being targeted and therefore constitute discrimination in employment.

The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures in order to ensure the full conformity of the forthcoming legislation with the Convention. It requests the Government to keep it informed of any development in this regard and to transmit a copy of the amended text, when adopted.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report. It observes, however, that it does not reply to the points raised in its previous comments.

The Committee noted that the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU, now ITUC – International Trade Union Confederation) submitted comments that referred in particular to violent police repression of a protest march by tea sector workers as well as acts of violence against a trade union organizer. The Committee recalls that freedom of association can only be exercised in conditions in which fundamental rights, and in particular those relating to human life and personal safety, are fully respected and guaranteed. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the Government will take all the necessary measures to ensure that this kind of violent acts will not take place in future.

The Committee had noted that sections 45(3) and 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act empower the parties concerned to apply to the Industrial Relations Court for a determination as to whether a particular strike involves an essential service. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on any strike declared illegal and the reasons therefor, as well as on any decisions rendered by the Industrial Relations Court under sections 45(3) and 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act.

A request concerning other points is being addressed directly to the Government.

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

The Committee takes note of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill, 2006.

Article 2. The Committee notes that section 18(4) of the Bill provides that if an organization fails to comply with the provisions of subsection (1) (on submission of financial and membership information to the Registrar) after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so, the Registrar may suspend and even cancel the registration and certificate of an organization. The Committee recalls that measures of suspension or dissolution by the administrative authority constitute serious infringements to the principles of freedom of association. Measures of dissolutions of trade union organizations should only occur in extremely serious cases and following a judicial decision guaranteeing the right to a defence.

Article 3. The Committee also notes that section 49 of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill, 2006, provides for the prohibition for the employer to take disciplinary action or dismiss an employee for participating in a strike in conformity with this Act. However, section (2) of this Bill provides that an employer may fairly dismiss an employee on grounds of operational requirements, notwithstanding that the operational requirements resulted from a strike in conformity with this Act. The Committee recalls that although the inclusion of dismissal on grounds of operational requirements is generally acceptable, in the specific situation of a strike this could lead to those involved in the strike being targeted and therefore constitute discrimination in employment.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received.

The Committee notes the comments of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) dated 10 August 2006, which refer to issues previously raised by the Committee on the right to strike and allege acts of violence against a trade union organizer. The Committee requests the Government to send its observations on the ICFTU comments, including those dated 31 August 2005 concerning in particular violent police repression of a protest march by tea workers (see 2005 observation, 76th Session).

In addition, in its previous comments, the Committee had noted that section 45(3) and 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act of 1996 empower the parties concerned to apply to the Industrial Relations Court for a determination as to whether a particular strike involves an essential service. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on any strike declared illegal and the reasons, therefore, as well as on any decisions rendered by the Industrial Relations Court under sections 45(3) and 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act.

Finally, the Committee notes the Government’s communication dated 2 October 2006 which refers to its reply in relation to the communication received from the Malawi Congress of Trade Unions concerning the application of the Convention. The Committee recalls that these comments were examined in the framework of Convention No. 98.

A request concerning other points is being addressed directly to the Government.

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

The Committee notes the comments submitted by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) in a communication dated 31 August 2005 with regard to violent police repression of a protest march by tea workers in September 2004 as well as issues previously raised by the Committee on the right to strike. Noting that freedom of assembly and demonstration constitutes a fundamental aspect of trade union rights and that the authorities should refrain from any interference which would restrict this right or impede the lawful exercise thereof, provided that the exercise of these rights does not cause a serious and imminent threat to public order, the Committee requests that the Government communicate its observations on the ICFTU comments, along with its response to the Committee’s previous direct request (see 2004 direct request, 75th Session) in its next report which is due in 2006.

The Committee also takes note of the comments made by the Malawi Congress of Trade Unions (MCTU) dated 26 December 2004 as well as the Government’s observations thereon. These comments will be examined in the framework of Convention No. 98.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report.

Article 3 of the Convention. Essential services. The Committee recalls that in its previous comments it had requested the Government to provide detailed information on any decisions rendered by the Industrial Relations Court under sections 45(3) and 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act, 1996, in relation to the question of whether a particular strike involves an essential service, and notes the information from the Government that the Court has so far not registered any dispute in connection with those sections and, accordingly, has not rendered any decision in this regard.

The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information in future reports on any strikes declared illegal and the reasons thereof, as well as on any decisions rendered by the Industrial Relations Court under sections 45(3) and 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act, 1996.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report. It also takes note of the comments formulated by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) on the application of the Convention as well as the Government’s detailed observations in reply to these comments.

The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the following.

Article 3 of the Convention. Essential services. The Committee had noted that section 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act of 1996 empowers the minister to apply to the Industrial Relations Court for a determination as to whether a threatened or actual strike involves an essential service, and thus had requested the Government to keep it informed of any decision from the Industrial Relations Court in this regard. In its latest report, the Government indicates that no decision from the Industrial Relations Court has yet been rendered on this point since no doubts or disagreements have occurred which would have led the minister to apply to the Court.

On this issue, the Committee further notes the comments formulated by the ICFTU to the effect that, while workers in essential services are permitted to strike after certain prescribed procedures have been met, the lack of specification as to which services are essential and which are not, results in many strikes being declared illegal. In its reply, the Government states that section 2 of the Labour Relations Act defines essential services as "services the interruption of which would endanger the life, health or personal safety of the whole or part of the population". The Government points out that this definition was adopted to avoid abuse by authorities in suppressing the workers’ right to strike by coming up with an endless list of essential services. In addition, sections 45(3) and 47(2) stipulate that the concerned parties can have recourse to the Industrial Relations Court for determination as to whether the branch of economic activity concerned belongs to essential services or not.

The Committee takes due note of this information. It once again requests the Government to provide detailed information in its next report, on the number of strikes which have been declared illegal and the reasons therefor, as well as on any decisions rendered by the Industrial Relations Court under sections 45(3) and 47(2).

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

The Committee notes with interest the Government’s first report, and in particular the adoption of the Labour Relations Act of 1996. Noting that section 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act of 1996 empowers the Minister to apply to the Industrial Relations Court for a determination as to whether a threatened or actual strike involves an essential service, the Committee requests the Government to keep it informed, in its next reports, of any decision from the Industrial Relations Court in this regard.