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

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

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

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

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention. Work of prisoners for private individuals, companies or associations. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 61 of the Execution of Punishments Act, which allows prisoners to work for trading companies, other legal entities and individual proprietorships, under the conditions provided for by the Minister of Justice. It recalled that, to be compatible with Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention, which expressly prohibits convicted prisoners from being hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations, such work should be carried out voluntarily and in conditions approximating a free employment relationship; this necessarily requires the formal and informed consent of the persons concerned, as well as further guarantees and safeguards covering the essential elements of a free labour relationship, such as wages and social security, etc. (see paragraphs 54–61 and
98–122 of the Committee’s General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour).

The Committee noted that section 38(a) of the Execution of Punishment Act and section 66(1) of the Execution of Punishment Rules provide for an obligation of prisoners to perform work assigned to them by the prison administration, and section 76 of the Act imposes disciplinary sanctions for the non-performance of the obligation to work or other obligations by the prisoners. The Committee notes that the obligation to work enforceable with the disciplinary sanctions is also provided for in section 10(1) and (2) of Ordinance No. 5 of the Ministry of Justice, of 21 March 2006, on the conditions and procedures relating to work performed by incarcerated persons, which was supplied by the Government with its previous report. It therefore appears from the above legislative provisions that, as a general rule, convicted prisoners are obliged to perform prison labour, even if they have the right to be given suitable work, in accordance with sections 24(1) and 64 of the Execution of Punishment Act.

The Committee has noted the Government’s repeated indications in its reports that performing labour is a right of prisoners, and that the work of prisoners both inside and outside prison premises is voluntary. The Government also indicates that, in practice, disciplinary sanctions for refusal to work in prisons are not applied. The Committee has noted the Government’s statement in its 2006 report that section 38(a) of the Execution of Punishment Act referred to above is going to be amended and that the principle of voluntary nature of prison labour will be introduced in the forthcoming amendments of the Execution of Punishment Act.

The Committee requests the Government to communicate a copy of amendments to the Execution of Punishment Act, as soon as they are adopted. It also requests the Government to supply a copy of a Model Agreement concluded by the State Enterprise “Prison Work Fund” and a private company concerning the use of prison labour, which was referred to by the Government as attached to its report, but has not been received in the Office.

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

The Committee has noted the Government’s reply to its earlier comments. It has noted, in particular, the detailed information on the application in practice of the Law on combating trafficking in human beings of 20 May 2003, as well as the information on the various measures taken by the Government in accordance with the National Programme to Combat Trafficking in Human Beings.

Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention. Work of prisoners for private individuals, companies or associations. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 61 of the Execution of Punishments Act, which allows prisoners to work for trading companies, other legal entities and individual proprietorships, under the conditions provided for by the Minister of Justice. It recalled that, to be compatible with Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention, which expressly prohibits convicted prisoners from being hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations, such work should be carried out voluntarily and in conditions approximating a free employment relationship; this necessarily requires the formal and informed consent of the persons concerned, as well as further guarantees and safeguards covering the essential elements of a free labour relationship, such as wages and social security, etc. (see paragraphs 54–61 and 98–122 of the Committee’s General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour).

The Committee noted that section 38(a) of the Execution of Punishment Act and section 66(1) of the Execution of Punishment Rules provide for an obligation of prisoners to perform work assigned to them by the prison administration, and section 76 of the Act imposes disciplinary sanctions for the non-performance of the obligation to work or other obligations by the prisoners. The Committee notes that the obligation to work enforceable with the disciplinary sanctions is also provided for in section 10(1) and (2) of Ordinance No. 5 of the Ministry of Justice, of 21 March 2006, on the conditions and procedures relating to work performed by incarcerated persons, which was supplied by the Government with its previous report. It therefore appears from the above legislative provisions that, as a general rule, convicted prisoners are obliged to perform prison labour, even if they have the right to be given suitable work, in accordance with sections 24(1) and 64 of the Execution of Punishment Act.

The Committee has noted the Government’s repeated indications in its reports that performing labour is a right of prisoners, and that the work of prisoners both inside and outside prison premises is voluntary. The Government also indicates that, in practice, disciplinary sanctions for refusal to work in prisons are not applied. The Committee has noted with interest the Government’s statement in its 2006 report that section 38(a) of the Execution of Punishment Act referred to above is going to be amended and that the principle of voluntary nature of prison labour will be introduced in the forthcoming amendments of the Execution of Punishment Act.

The Committee requests the Government to communicate a copy of amendments to the Execution of Punishment Act, as soon as they are adopted. It also requests the Government to supply a copy of a Model Agreement concluded by the State Enterprise “Prison Work Fund” and a private company concerning the use of prison labour, which was referred to by the Government as attached to its report, but has not been received in the ILO.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the following matters raised in its previous direct request:

Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention. Work of prisoners for private employers. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 61 of the Execution of Punishments Act, which allows prisoners to work for trading companies, other legal entities and individual proprietorships, under the conditions provided for by the Minister of Justice. It recalled that, to be compatible with Article 2, paragraph 2(c), of the Convention, which expressly prohibits convicted prisoners from being hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations, such work should be carried out in conditions approximating a free employment relationship; this necessarily requires the formal consent of the persons concerned, as well as further guarantees and safeguards covering the essential elements of a free labour relationship, such as wages and social security, etc. (see paragraphs 119 and 128 to 143 of the Committee’s General Report to the 89th Session of the International Labour Conference, 2001).

The Committee has noted the Government’s repeated statement in its reports that performing labour is a right of prisoners, but it is not deemed obligatory. The Government refers in this connection to sections 24(1) and 64 of the Execution of Punishment Act, which stipulate that prisoners have the right to be given suitable work, which should be assigned by the prison administration in accordance with the existing possibilities and taking into account the prisoners’ age, sex, state of health, working capacity and their rehabilitation needs. The Government indicates that the work of prisoners both inside and outside prison premises is voluntary, and their work for private companies is only possible if they give their explicit consent in writing and if occupational safety and health requirements are ensured by the employer.

The Committee notes, however, that section 38(a) of the Execution of Punishment Act expressly provides for an obligation of prisoners to perform work assigned to them by the prison administration, and section 76 of the same Act imposes disciplinary sanctions for the non-performance of the obligation to work or other obligations by the prisoners. The Committee further notes that section 66(1) of the Execution of Punishment Rules also provides for the obligation of all able-bodied prisoners to work. It therefore appears from the above legislative provisions that, as a general rule, convicted prisoners are obliged to perform prison labour, even if they have the right to be given suitable work, in accordance with sections 24(1) and 64 of the Execution of Punishment Act.

The Committee therefore again requests the Government to indicate, as regards the abovementioned section 61 of the Execution of Punishment Act, how the voluntary consent of the prisoners to work for private employers is guaranteed, so that it is free from the menace of any penalty, including any loss of privileges or other disadvantages following from a refusal to work, and to supply copies of relevant provisions. Please also communicate a copy of Ordinance No. LS-03-416 (1991) of the Minister of Justice concerning prisoners’ remuneration, referred to by the Government in its report, as well as copies of any other texts issued by the Ministry of Justice concerning the conditions under which prisoners may work for private employers, to which reference is made in section 61(1) of the Execution of Punishment Act. The Committee would appreciate it if the Government would also supply a sample copy of an agreement concluded by the administration of a penitentiary institution and a private company concerning the use of prison labour, as referred to in the Government’s report.

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

The Committee has noted the Government’s reply to its earlier comments. Referring to its 2000 general observation concerning measures to combat trafficking in human beings, it has noted with interest the adoption of the Law against the illegal trafficking in human beings of 20 May 2003, as well as the information on the practical measures taken by the Government in this field. The Committee has also noted the Government’s reply to the comments made by the Confederation of the Independent Trade Unions of Bulgaria concerning the application of section 120 of the Labour Code.

Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention. Work of prisoners for private employers. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 61 of the Execution of Punishments Act, which allows prisoners to work for trading companies, other legal entities and individual proprietorships, under the conditions provided for by the Minister of Justice. It recalled that, to be compatible with Article 2, paragraph 2(c), of the Convention, which expressly prohibits convicted prisoners from being hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations, such work should be carried out in conditions approximating a free employment relationship; this necessarily requires the formal consent of the persons concerned, as well as further guarantees and safeguards covering the essential elements of a free labour relationship, such as wages and social security, etc. (see paragraphs 119 and 128 to 143 of the Committee’s General Report to the 89th Session of the International Labour Conference, 2001).

The Committee has noted the Government’s repeated statement in its reports that performing labour is a right of prisoners, but it is not deemed obligatory. The Government refers in this connection to sections 24(1) and 64 of the Execution of Punishment Act, which stipulate that prisoners have the right to be given suitable work, which should be assigned by the prison administration in accordance with the existing possibilities and taking into account the prisoners’ age, sex, state of health, working capacity and their rehabilitation needs. The Government indicates that the work of prisoners both inside and outside prison premises is voluntary, and their work for private companies is only possible if they give their explicit consent in writing and if occupational safety and health requirements are ensured by the employer.

The Committee notes, however, that section 38(a) of the Execution of Punishment Act expressly provides for an obligation of prisoners to perform work assigned to them by the prison administration, and section 76 of the same Act imposes disciplinary sanctions for the non-performance of the obligation to work or other obligations by the prisoners. The Committee further notes that section 66(1) of the Execution of Punishment Rules also provides for the obligation of all able-bodied prisoners to work. It therefore appears from the above legislative provisions that, as a general rule, convicted prisoners are obliged to perform prison labour, even if they have the right to be given suitable work, in accordance with sections 24(1) and 64 of the Execution of Punishment Act.

The Committee therefore again requests the Government to indicate, as regards the abovementioned section 61 of the Execution of Punishment Act, how the voluntary consent of the prisoners to work for private employers is guaranteed, so that it is free from the menace of any penalty, including any loss of privileges or other disadvantages following from a refusal to work, and to supply copies of relevant provisions. Please also communicate a copy of Ordinance No. LS-03-416 (1991) of the Minister of Justice concerning prisoners’ remuneration, referred to by the Government in its report, as well as copies of any other texts issued by the Ministry of Justice concerning the conditions under which prisoners may work for private employers, to which reference is made in section 61(1) of the Execution of Punishment Act. The Committee would appreciate it if the Government would also supply a sample copy of an agreement concluded by the administration of a penitentiary institution and a private company concerning the use of prison labour, as referred to in the Government’s report.

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

1. The Committee has noted the Government’s reply to its earlier comments. It has also noted the information supplied by the Government in reply to its 2000 general observation concerning measures to combat trafficking in human beings, and in particular, the elaboration of the draft Law against the illegal trafficking in human beings. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide a copy of this Law, as soon as it is adopted.

Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention. The Committee previously noted that section 61 of the Law on the Execution of Punishments allows prisoners to work for trading companies, other legal entities and individual proprietorships, under the conditions provided for by the Minister of Justice. In its latest report, the Government expresses the view that work exacted from prisoners in the course of detention must not be considered as forced or compulsory labour.

The Committee recalls in this connection that, under Article 2, paragraph 2(c), 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 if two conditions are met, namely:

… 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.

The Committee has always made it clear that the two conditions are cumulative and apply independently; 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 (see paragraph 119 of the Committee’s General Report to the 89th Session of the International Labour Conference, 2001). As the Committee repeatedly pointed out, it is only when work or service is performed in conditions approximating a free employment relationship that work by prisoners for private companies can be held compatible with the explicit prohibition of the Convention; this necessarily requires the formal consent of the persons concerned, as well as further guarantees and safeguards covering the essential elements of a free labour relationship, such as wages and social security, etc. (ibid., paragraphs 128-143).

The Committee previously noted the Government’s statement in its report that performing labour is a right of prisoners, but it is not deemed obligatory. However, in its latest report the Government refers to the "existing element of obligation". The Committee requests the Government to clarify the situation, indicating clearly whether the work of prisoners is compulsory or not and supplying copies of relevant provisions, and more particularly, as regards the abovementioned section 61, how the voluntary consent of the prisoners to work for private employers is guaranteed, so that it is free from the menace of any penalty, including any loss of privileges or other disadvantages following from a refusal to work.

In the light of the above considerations, the Committee again requests the Government to describe the conditions in which work of prisoners for private employers takes place, including payment of normal wages, social security and observance of occupational safety and health legislation (e.g. through labour inspection), and indicate how those conditions are determined. Please supply copies of complete texts of the Law on the Execution of Punishments (together with the regulations on its application) and the Juvenile Delinquency Act, 1958, as amended. Please also communicate copies of any other texts issued by the Ministry of Justice concerning the conditions under which prisoners may work for private parties, to which reference is made in section 61(1) of the Law on the Execution of Punishments.

2. The Committee has noted the comments by the Confederation of the Independent Trade Unions of Bulgaria, transmitted by the Government with its report, alleging violations in the implementation of section 120 of the Labour Code (as amended in 1992) concerning a temporary transfer of a worker without his/her consent to another post in the same or another enterprise for a period of up to 45 calendar days during a year, with a possibility to assign a worker a job of a different nature without taking account of the worker’s qualifications, such a transfer being enforceable with disciplinary sanctions, including dismissal. The Committee requests the Government to refer to these allegations in its next report and to supply any available information on the application of section 120 in practice, describing the circumstances of such transfers, with particular emphasis on the conditions of work before and after a transfer has been carried out, and indicating sanctions imposed on workers in case of refusal.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s reply to its earlier comments. It notes, in particular, the adoption of the Alternative Military Service Act, of 6 November 1998.

Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention.  The Committee notes that section 61 of the Serving Punishments Act allows prisoners to work for trading companies, other legal entities and individual proprietorships, under the conditions provided for by the Minister of Justice. The Government states in its report that performing labour is a right of prisoners, but it is not deemed obligatory. The Committee requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, the provisions in the national laws or regulations showing that the work of prisoners is not compulsory, and more particularly, as regards the abovementioned section 61, how the voluntary consent of the prisoners to work for private parties is guaranteed, so that it is free from the menace of any penalty, including any loss of privileges or other disadvantages following from a refusal to work.

The Committee also notes section 62 and requests that the Government also describe the conditions in which work of prisoners for private employers takes place, including payment of normal wages, social security and observance of occupational safety and health legislation (e.g. through labour inspection), and indicate how those conditions are determined. Please supply copies of complete texts of the Serving Punishments Act (together with the regulations on its application) and the Juvenile Delinquency Act, 1958, as amended. Please also communicate copies of any other texts issued by the Ministry of Justice concerning the conditions under which prisoners may work for private parties, to which reference is made in section 61(1) of the Serving Punishments Act.

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

1. Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Referring to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest from the Government's report that, according to section 128(a) of the Defence and Armed Forces Act (as amended in State Gazette No. 122 of 1997), a career military service contract can, after an initial minimum duration of three years for the first contract, be terminated by written notice of six months. The Committee further notes that the National Assembly is considering an Act to replace compulsory military service with alternative service at the request of the person concerned. The Committee asks the Government to communicate the text of that Act when it has been adopted.

2. Article 2(2)(c). The Committee asks the Government to provide information concerning any obligation to work imposed on inmates of reform schools for juveniles, and to communicate any laws, rules or regulations applying to those institutions, particularly as regards the work of inmates.

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

With reference to its observation, the Committee asks the Government to provide, in its next report, additional information on the following points:

1. The Committee notes the provision of section 128(2) of the Law on the Defence and Armed Forces, according to which career servicemen who concluded a contract on career military service under section 112 of this Law (i.e. former conscripts who are entitled to conclude such a contract during the first 12 months of their compulsory service) are excluded from the application of section 128(1) of the Law, which provides for a possibility for career servicemen to leave the service at their own request:

The Committee would appreciate it if the Government would specify the conditions of leaving the service at their own request for this category of career servicemen, either at certain reasonable intervals or by means of notice of reasonable length, and supply copies of relevant provisions.

2. Please also indicate whether a possibility to undergo an alternative service instead of compulsory military service, provided for in section 84 of the above-mentioned Law, may be used only at the request of a person concerned.

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

Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the adoption on 13 December 1995 of the Law on the Defence and Armed Forces, which entered into force on 27 February 1996. It notes with satisfaction that section 128(1) of the Law, concerning the conditions for termination of the service of career members of the armed forces, provides for their right to leave the service at their own request by giving six months' notice. It also notes with satisfaction that section 111(1) of the above-mentioned Law provides for the limitation of compulsory military service to work of a purely military character. The Committee is raising certain questions in this connection in a request addressed directly to the Government.

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

The Committee notes with interest the information supplied by the Government in its report in reply to earlier comments. It notes that the Government will report on the enactment of the Armed Forces Bill as soon as it is voted by Parliament. Recalling the Government's indication in its report received in 1992 that the Bill will take into account all comments made by the Committee under the Convention, the Committee hopes that the new legislation will ensure:

1. the limitation of compulsory military service to work of a purely military character so that enrolment in units such as the Construction Corps will be reserved to volunteers; and

2. the right of all career members of the armed forces, including officers and non-commissioned officers, to leave the service in time of peace on their own initiative after a reasonable period of service, by giving notice or at specified intervals. The Committee looks forward to communication of the provisions adopted to this end.

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

1. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the provisions respecting the special labour services, and in particular the building brigades covered by section 3 of the Universal Military Service Act of 1958 and Decree No. 100 of 1954, under which young persons may be called upon to perform their military service for two years in the special labour services. The Committee also noted that by virtue of Decree No. 100 the construction forces carry out economic, constructional and other tasks and that activities are organized for the ideological formation and education of the conscripts.

The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the duration of training, the nature of activities performed, and the proportion of young people receiving vocational training.

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report as well as the text of the provisions appended.

The Committee notes that according to the Government young people are selected for conscription in the construction corps at the preliminary examination of their fitness for service. The vast majority has received an occupational training before being called up. Those who have not received previous training are, after recruitment and basic military service, enrolled at their request in an occupational training course, at the end of which they undergo a period of work experience and take an examination.

The Government adds that on the strength of the training thus received all young people are assigned to building brigades and perform a definite work suiting their qualifications.

The Committee takes due note of this information. The Committee recalls that under the Convention only work of a purely military nature falls outside the scope of the Convention. A definite work in a building brigade has not such character.

Noting the Government's statement in its report that an Armed Forces Bill is being drafted which considers the future of the construction corps, the Committee hopes that the necessary measures will be taken to ensure that conscripts can only be called upon to perform work or services of a purely military nature, in conformity with Article 2, paragraph 2(a) of the Convention except in the case of an emergency (force majeure).

2. Referring to its previous comments the Committee notes that Decree No. 1253 of 30 June 1989 respecting civil mobilization in peacetime was repealed by an Act adopted on 18 December 1989 repealing some statutory provisions adopted between May and November 1989 (published in the Official Gazette, No. 99 of 22 December 1989).

The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the provisions at present governing civil mobilization and a copy of the applicable text.

3. The Committee notes that under section 18 of the universal military service Law, 1958 (as modified), the text of which was provided by the Government, officers and non-commissioned officers may resign after 25 years of service. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on measures taken or envisaged to preserve the right of this category of personnel in the service of the State to leave the service on their own initiative after a reasonable period, either at specified intervals or by giving notice.

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

1. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the provisions respecting the special labour services, and in particular the building brigades covered by section 3 of the Universal Military Service Act of 1958 and Decree No. 100 of 1954, under which young persons may be called upon to perform their military service for two years in the special labour services. The Committee noted the Government's indications that young persons receive, within this framework, a civilian vocational training corresponding to civilian qualifications and that they may, when beginning their service, declare their preferences concerning the trades that they wish to master. The Committee requested the Government to supply copies of any texts concerning the principle of choice of training in the building brigades by young persons called upon to perform their compulsory military service, including a copy of the instruction referred to by the Government, and to supply information on the work carried out by young persons who have not obtained a vocational diploma.

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report that young persons have a choice between a wide range of types of training and may express their preference at the stage of the medical examination for fitness for service; those who are assigned to the construction forces may, at their request, be assigned to training schools. Young persons who do not manage to obtain a vocational diploma receive a certificate of participation in the training courses and they may, after finishing their service in the construction forces, enrole in a vocational education centre. The Committee also examined the documents supplied by the Government, namely Decree No. 100 of 1954, as amended and the Regulations for the Educational Units/Schools of the Construction Corps engaged in training builders, fitters and technicians (the title page and page 4 of these Regulations).

The Committee notes that it is indicated on page 4 of the Regulations that the selection of students is made during their individual training on the grounds of their interests and previous experience, and that the schools are replenished according to the list of young persons selected. The Committee also notes that by virtue of Decree No. 100 the construction forces carry out economic, constructional and other tasks and that activities are organised for the ideological formation and the education of the conscripts. The Committee understands, on the basis of these texts, that only a part of the young persons recruited into these forces are selected to receive training. The Committee recalls that the Convention provides that, leaving aside the general exception respecting cases of emergency, compulsory military service is exempted from the scope of the Convention only for work of a purely military character and that restrictions on the freedom protected by the Convention are accepted only to the extent required by necessities such as fighting calamities or the exigencies of national defence. The Committee also refers to paragraphs 147 and 149 of its 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour in which it noted the clarification which the Conference deliberations on the Special Youth Schemes Recommendation, 1970 (No. 136), have provided concerning the relationship between the forced labour Convention and certain compulsory schemes for young persons.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate the duration of training and to specify whether it covers the whole of the two years spent in the construction forces. It also requests the Government to supply statistics on the number of young persons selected to receive vocational training in relation to those who are not selected, and the number of diplomas issued among those who have been selected. The Committee also requests the Government to supply detailed information on the nature of the activities performed by young persons who are not selected to receive vocational training. It would appreciate that the Government supply the full text of the Regulations that are applicable in this respect.

2. The Committee notes that under the provisions of Decree No. 1253 of 30 June 1989 respecting civilian mobilisation in peacetime, such mobilisation is carried out to provide the labour force and technical means that are necessary in the event of extraordinary situations or disasters which result in particular difficulties for the national economy and the country. Civilian mobilisation applies to men between 18 and 60 and women between 18 and 55 years and may take the form of call-up at the workplace or compulsory labour in another enterprise, institution or organisation under penalty of a fine in the event of refusal (sections 1 to 5 and 9 of the Decree).

The Committee refers to the explanations given in paragraphs 63 to 66 of its 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour in which it noted that legislation which was intended to permit the call-up of labour in exceptional circumstances is sometimes worded in terms that might permit its application in circumstances other than cases of emergency in the sense of Article 2, paragraph 2(d), of the Convention. In order to avoid any uncertainty as to the compatibility of national provisions with the applicable international standards, it should be 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 existence or well-being of the whole or part of the population. Furthermore, once emergency measures are no longer necessary, and unless they are automatically limited in duration, they should be terminated by a formal and public decision or declaration. In this particular case, the concept of extraordinary situation or emergency resulting in particular difficulties for the national economy and the country exceeds the strict framework of the concept of emergency in the sense of the Convention.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on any application of the Decree and on the measures that have been taken or are envisaged to ensure that the circumstances set out in the legislation under which people may be called up are explicitly limited to situations that would endanger the existence or the well-being of the whole or part of the population, in accordance with Article 2, paragraph 2(d), of the Convention.

3. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the Government's statement that the conditions for termination of employment by officers and non-commissioned officers who are re-employed are governed by the Universal Military Service Act of 1958. The Committee once again requests the Government to transmit a copy of the 1958 Act, which the Government has announced that it will send, with any subsequent amendments.

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

With reference to its previous comments concerning the restrictions on the freedom of members of co-operative farms to leave the farm at their own initiative, the Committee notes with satisfaction that under section 342 of the new Labour Code, which came into force in 1987, members of co-operatives may terminate their legal work relationship after giving 30 days' notice or, in certain cases, without notice.