Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2013, Publication: 102nd ILC session (2013)



The Government provided the following written information.

Having ratified the Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138), and the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182), the Government had consistently been implementing the National Plan of Action in this area. For example, the Labour Code provided the minimum age for employment – 16, in exceptional cases, with the permission of parents or persons replacing them – 15. For workers below 18 years, employers are obliged to provide necessary conditions for a combination of work with study and privileged terms for work and rest, to ensure the observance of the labour safety norms, including prevention from dangerous types of labour. Moreover, on 26 March 2012, the Cabinet of Ministers adopted the decision “About additional measures for the realization in 2012–13 of the Forced Labour Convention and the Convention concerning prohibition and immediate action for the elimination of the worst forms of child labour, ratified by the Republic of Uzbekistan”. In addition, the system of state institutions for the elimination of the worst forms of child labour was created. The special Commission on Affairs of Minors of the Cabinet of Ministers, headed by the General Public Prosecutor had been functioning, whose competence included deciding practically all questions concerning the elimination of the worst forms of child labour. With the decision of the Cabinet of Ministers on 24 March 2011, the inter-institutional Working Group on the preparation and presentation of the information on the implementation of the ratified ILO Conventions was formed.

With a view to eliminating forced labour and the worst forms of child labour, comprehensive measures were developed, connected with the creation of about 1 million jobs annually, by ensuring the employment of not less than 500,000 graduates of the vocational colleges that were for the first time entering the labour market. On 29 July 2009, the Ministry of Justice registered the new edition of the list of jobs with adverse working conditions, forbidden for workers below 18 years (No. 1990), that was developed by the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection and the Ministry of Health, according to the Labour Code and the decision of the Cabinet of Ministers, No. 207 of 12 September 2008. In addition, with the joint decision of the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection and the Ministry of Health of 21 January 2010, “The regulation about the requirement for elimination of the use of labour of youth” was confirmed, according to which the use of youth labour in the following jobs is prohibited: (a) underground, underwater, at dangerous heights or in closed spaces; (b) with dangerous mechanisms and in unhealthy conditions at which the minor can be exposed to the influence of dangerous substances or the processes harming his or her health; (c) the jobs carried out in especially difficult conditions (work at night, etc.); (d) which by its character can damage the morals of this category of workers; and (e) connected with lifting and moving the weights exceeding the established limits. The State Labour Inspectorate of the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection carried out regular monitoring with respect to compliance with the labour legislation regarding minors.

In 2012, during monitoring by the State Labour Inspectorate, 448 cases of violations of the labour legislation concerning minors were revealed, 432 instructions were given out, 36 officials were charged with administrative responsibility and fined more than 13.1 million Uzbek soms (UMS). Violations of the labour legislation with respect to minors typically concerned the following: guarantees of employment of persons below 18 (section 239 of the Labour Code); rights in the field of occupational safety and health; working hours; granting of holidays (section 240); labour record books (section 81); termination of the labour contract (sections 97, 99 and 100); and registration of the contract (section 107).

The major factors in the fight against the worst forms of child labour were the measures adopted for the creation of jobs and youth employment. These measures included graduates of educational institutions, the reformation of the education system providing 12 years’ compulsory education for all children, the vast system of social protection, including the developed infrastructure, the mechanisms of material aid for families, and custody and guardianship. There was no mass spread of the antisocial phenomenon such as “neglect of children” which was the major factor of generating the worst forms of child labour in many countries; there was no child slavery and recruitment of children in armed conflicts. Thus there was an artificial inflation of the issue about “as if mass, long-lasting forced labour of children on the cotton fields of Uzbekistan”. The use of child labour as a method of unfair economic competition was unacceptable, and Uzbek cotton took the leading position in the world market due to its quality.

The world community had developed concrete norms defining the admissibility of child labour, including in agriculture. ILO Convention No. 138 does not limit the possibility of the involvement of children in feasible labour activities in domestic work or in family businesses as “helping” members of a family. ILO Convention No. 182 specifically defined the kinds of activities which are certainly unacceptable. From this it followed that a selective approach, both to the Convention and its implementation in the individual countries was inadmissible. The Government had presented information on the implementation of this Convention (and others) in due time. However, for the last four years the Committee of Experts, not properly estimating the official information provided by the Government, had been referring to the unconfirmed data of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) and the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), that the Government forced schoolchildren (estimated at half a million to 1.5 million children of school age) to work in a national campaign for the cotton harvest for a period of about three months every year. The Committee of Experts had also been referring to unfounded statements of the ITUC that about half of all harvested cotton in Uzbekistan was grown by forced child labour, that while gathering cotton there were accidents leading to injuries and deaths of schoolchildren, that they were not allowed to go to the doctor even if they were sick, that for each region quotas on gathering of cotton were established and that the governors of the regions (hokims) were assigned to ensure the implementation of these quotas.

It had called on the Government to adopt immediate and effective measures to eliminate forced labour and hazardous work of children up to 18 in cotton production. The following concrete facts showed the inconsistency of these conclusions: all cotton, for example, in 2012, more than 3.4 million tonnes, in Uzbekistan was gathered by private commodity producers – farmers (there were about 70,000 farms and more than 1.4 million people occupied them) within 30–40 days, according to concluded contracts in advance, and these farmers had no economic interest in attracting additional workers; the representative office of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) in Uzbekistan, on the basis of data of the monitoring carried out in 2012, ascertained that pupils of schools were not involved in cotton harvesting; and according to the Ministry of Health in 2012, during the cotton harvest in 6,161 places measures were taken to ensure the delivery and storage of drinking water; and 6,583 toilets were installed; 7,902 kilograms of antiseptics were distributed; and 7,700 canteens were set up.

Thus it was necessary to distinguish between child labour and its worst forms which involved infringements of the rights of the child and demanded elimination. With a view to implementing effective measures on the elimination of forced labour and the worst forms of child labour, the practice of parliamentary hearings on labour and social development had been introduced. In 2011 and 2012, the members of Parliament heard the reports of the Ministries of Labour and Social Protection, and of Higher and Secondary Special Education concerning the implementation of programmes for the establishment of workplaces and the maintenance of employment including for graduates of educational institutions. Concrete work was done to bring to the attention of concerned ministries, agencies and public organizations, and also the international organizations, such as the ILO, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), and UNICEF, the measures adopted by the Government to implement the ratified Conventions of the ILO. For this purpose, the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection held a seminar in Tashkent City in May 2012 on the theme “Realization of substantive provisions of the ILO Conventions ratified by the Republic of Uzbekistan” and meetings in the corresponding ministries and agencies were held. The ILO participated in both the seminar and bilateral meetings. The participants of the seminar and the organized meetings recommended developing cooperation with the ILO by drafting and undertaking concrete programmes; informing the ILO and other international organizations about the measures adopted on the implementation of the ILO Conventions; and carrying out monitoring of observance of requirements of the ratified ILO Conventions, including concerning forced labour and the worst forms of child labour.

The information set forth above, and also materials requested by the Committee of Experts concerning the implementation of the Convention, as well as the Forty-Hour Week Convention, 1935 (No. 47), the Holidays with Pay Convention, 1936 (No. 52), the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) and the Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122), were officially presented to the ILO secretariat, and on the eve of the present session of the International Labour Conference, the positive reply from the International Labour Standards Department of the International Labour Office was received. If the results of the abovementioned measures on implementation of the ratified Conventions on the elimination of forced labour and the worst forms of child labour were recognized, it would be necessary to reflect them appropriately in the decisions of this Committee. With a view to increasing awareness on measures carried out in Uzbekistan on the implementation of the ratified Conventions, including concerning forced labour and the worst forms of child labour, it has been considered possible, in the context of discussions concerning cooperation with the ILO and the European Union (EU), the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, the Council of the Federation of Trade Unions, the Chamber of Commerce and Industry, and the National Centre of Uzbekistan for Human Rights to carry out, in November–December 2013 in Tashkent City, a round table on “the prospects of technical cooperation on the implementation of the international obligations of Uzbekistan in the ILO framework”. Representatives of the ILO and its Moscow Office, the European Commission, the international organizations accredited in Uzbekistan (UNDP, UNICEF, UzbyuroKES, etc.), and also foreign representatives of workers and employers, with the participation of representatives of the interested ministries and agencies, members of Parliament and the representatives of non-governmental organizations of Uzbekistan, would be invited. During the round table and bilateral meetings, consideration of the following basic questions would be proposed: cooperation with the ILO on the implementation of the national plan of action on the realization of the Convention, including concerning the organization and carrying out of monitoring of the worst forms of child labour; participation of trade unions, as representative bodies of workers, in practical realization of ILO Conventions on forced labour and the worst forms of child labour, the rights of representatives of workers at the enterprises and to collective bargaining; participation of employers (the Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the Council of Farmers) in the realization of the ratified Conventions on forced labour and the worst forms of child labour, and also the state policy of the development of businesses and ensuring access to employment by the population; prospects of ratification of various Conventions and Recommendations of the ILO, presentation of country reports to the ILO; protection of the social and labour rights of citizens in the light of the ratified Conventions of the United Nations and the ILO; implementation of the international social and labour standards through the national legislation, etc.

In addition, before the Committee a Government representative stated that the protection of children’s rights was one of the priorities of the country, which was implemented through coherent and systemic policies including: (i) the adoption of legislation and the further improvement of existing legislation on children’s rights; (ii) the strengthening of supervisory mechanisms; (iii) the assistance to non-governmental organizations, the media and civil society organizations; and (iv) international cooperation with the relevant United Nations specialized agencies related to the rights of the child. In the context of the economic crisis, the Government was pursuing a policy aimed at preventing the worsening of living conditions, particularly of children, and significant progress had been made in the areas of education, health, and gender equality. All these policies aimed at giving full effect to the provisions of ILO Conventions, including Convention No. 182.

The Government had adopted a national plan of action under which specific measures to eliminate the worst forms of child labour had been implemented, including the adoption of a legislative framework, provisions in the national legislation on the minimum age for admission to employment or work and on the worst forms of child labour, as well as special protection measures for children under 18 years of age. In addition to the written information provided to this Committee on the issues to be discussed during the round table in November–December 2013 which has been proposed, as well as in bilateral meetings, he mentioned the issue of capacity building of the tripartite partners through training and international reporting on future legislation. In addition, during the Universal Periodic Review of the second report submitted to the United Nations Human Rights Council, the Government accepted 101 recommendations, 23 of which related to the protection and guarantee of children’s rights. He affirmed his Government’s willingness to implement a tripartite Memorandum of Understanding on cooperation with the UNDP and UNICEF covering 2013–16 which included a package of measures. The recent visit of the United Nations Assistant Secretary-General on Human Rights to Uzbekistan on 27–28 May 2013 also demonstrated the willingness to cooperate on the recommendations made by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and UNDP. In May 2013, a mid-term report related to cooperation between the Government and UNICEF was also discussed and made a recommendation on monitoring and protection of children’s rights. The discussion on the Government’s third and fourth periodic reports had also taken place in the Committee on the Rights of the Child, and reports had been submitted on a range of issues, including trafficking, prostitution and armed conflict. Further, there had been discussions with the European Commission and bilateral discussions with a number of countries, including the United States.

Turning to some of the constraints in implementing the provisions of the Convention, he stated that these were related to the global economic recession and its impact on vulnerable groups and communities, and stressed that the aggregate effect on the quality and means to implement the Convention had to be taken into account. This also included the serious ecological situation and the water issue in Central Asia which had an impact on food security and access to water. Central Asia had great difficulties with ensuring peace and stability, which had a bearing on trafficking in children. Religious extremism and terrorism also undermined stability. Overall, further strengthening of the organizational and legal mechanisms was needed to ensure respect for the rule of law in the country and respect of children’s rights. His Government fully supported ILO action in this area and was committed to an impartial, open and constructive form of cooperation to improve the situation with respect to the rights set out in the Convention. It was committed to fulfilling its international obligations and to implement the recommendations of the Committee of Experts, in cooperation with the ILO.

The Worker members noted that the Committee was yet again discussing the forced participation of children in cotton production in Uzbekistan, often in hazardous conditions. They also noted the conflicting statements on the subject. On the one hand, the Government claimed that now that the law prohibited children from working, that monitoring arrangements were effective, that the economy had developed and that the private sector was responsible for the harvesting, there was no longer any forced child labour in the sector. On the other hand, the ILO social partners (the ITUC and the IOE) presented figures and reports showing that forced labour of children still existed during the cotton harvests. Moreover, several international bodies, including UNICEF, had observed first-hand in the autumn of 2011 that children between 11 and 17 years of age were working full-time in the cotton plantations, that their mobilization was organized by the public authorities and that, in some cases, the plantation owners themselves had made private arrangements with schools. The central authorities set quotas for the regional governments, and these in turn set quotas for the schools.

The Worker members emphasized that there had recently been a change in the time-honoured practice. Although the work was now for shorter periods in the more densely populated areas and fewer of the working children were under the minimum age, that this was done at the expense of students between 16 and 18 years of age who were taken on under particularly harsh conditions. As to monitoring the implementation of the Convention on the ground – another point raised by the Committee of Experts – the Worker members noted the Government’s claim that all the necessary arrangements had been made to prevent forced labour among children. The Worker members would like to see for themselves just how such a deeply rooted practice had been done away with so quickly, especially as the Government had not provided any specific information on the number of offences recorded and the number of people prosecuted for mobilizing child workers for the cotton harvest. Since the Government maintained that children were no longer involved in the cotton harvest, there was no reason why it should not allow independent monitors to verify the situation in the country itself.

The Employer members indicated that there was broad consensus among the social partners concerning the matter at hand. Since the ratification of the Convention in 2008, the Committee of Experts had commented every year on the Government’s failure to comply with its obligations under the Convention, and this was the fourth year in a row that the issue of children being forced to work in the cotton harvest had been taken up by this Committee. The Employer members reiterated their concern about the systematic and persistent use of children in the cotton harvest for up to three months in a year and the negative impact of this practice on the health and education of children, as previously discussed. The social partners, together with other non-governmental organizations had provided information that children continued to be pulled out of school for the harvest. Despite improvements made in one region, it did not appear that the situation described in the 2011 UNICEF report, and noted by the Committee of Experts in its last report, had substantially changed from 2011 to 2012. The only difference appeared to be a reduction in the number of children under the age of 16 forced to work in the harvest, while the number of children between 16 and 18 years of age who were being forced to work during this period, instead of attending school, had increased. The Employer members emphasized that the Convention defined children as being under the age of 18, and that moving the problem from one group of children (under 16 years of age) to another group of children (under 18 years of age) did not cure the lack of compliance, but created another compliance issue.

While the Employer members appreciated the ratification of fundamental Conventions by member States, including Convention No. 182, such ratification was meaningless if it was not accompanied by effective implementation and a demonstrated commitment to live up to international obligations. They further expressed concern that this Committee still had to deal with this long-standing problem and that the Government had provided a similar response in each of the years that the Committee had dealt with the case. Moreover, it was particularly worrying when a member State ignored the conclusions of the Conference Committee, including the request in 2010 and 2011 to accept a high-level mission to allow for the effective monitoring during the harvest season. The Employer members emphasized that, as a minimum, the Government had to allow ILO monitoring during this year’s harvest period with full access to all regions of the country. They expressed the hope that such monitoring would show that the Government’s actions matched its words.

The Worker member of Uzbekistan indicated that the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, the Chamber of Commerce and the trade unions in the country were working together for the effective implementation of international labour Conventions. She particularly emphasized the role of trade unions and their participation in various activities in this regard. The implementation of the Convention was being ensured through a relevant tripartite agreement, as well as standards related to the prohibition of child labour in a great number of agreements at the sectoral, regional and enterprise level. On the basis of the recommendations made by this Committee, working groups for the monitoring of child labour and combating its worst forms had been set up, working together with the trade unions at all levels within an agreed framework. These activities had shown that there had been no use of child labour or lack of school attendance. Only in one region two high-school students were found to be working with their parents after school, which had resulted in the release from duty of the headmaster of the relevant school. In her view, the social monitoring of legislation by trade unions would guarantee social and economic protection, including of those working in the cotton harvest. She further highlighted awareness raising and educational measures on child labour and forced labour during harvest among farmers, parents and teachers disseminated through publications, media programmes and education centres. Annual round tables, particularly relating to forced labour, were also being organized with the Government and the social partners, and annual training courses were being held on the rights of children for regional authorities with the participation of trade unions. Furthermore, they were also aiming at eradicating child labour through leisure activities particularly for disadvantaged children up to the age of 14 years, and work and cultural activities for children above the age of 14 years. Furthermore, promotional activities were aimed at encouraging children to go into higher education. Considering the measures taken, she requested that Uzbekistan be removed from the list of individual cases of this Committee, and expressed interest in ongoing technical cooperation on the basis of mutually accepted standards for the enhancement of the rights enshrined in the Convention.

The Employer member of Uzbekistan elaborated on the various activities which the Chamber of Commerce had carried out since its creation in 2004, namely its participation in the plan of action to implement ILO Conventions, including the Convention, its programme to create new jobs, especially in the rural areas, the seminars to identify relevant legal provisions and the dissemination of brochures regarding legal provisions on minimum age and the Convention. He pointed out that with agriculture being exclusively a private sector activity with high dynamic growth, the Government needed to create the necessary conditions for business; a dialogue was already ongoing in this respect. Historically, his country had always given great importance to education and science, and the Chamber of Commerce was working hard to cooperate with educational institutions in this regard. While social dialogue had been established only very recently in the country, he considered this a success as this had led to legislation on minimum age and a national monitoring mechanism, although this mechanism could be improved to take into account ILO standards. He affirmed the commitment of the employers of Uzbekistan to cooperate with the ILO and the EU to implement programmes, and considered that technical cooperation could improve competitiveness based on shared experience. It was necessary to further improve the national monitoring system to implement and apply ILO Conventions, in cooperation with the ILO Offices in Geneva and Moscow and the workers’ and employers’ representatives. It was difficult to achieve results in a short time and he expressed the hope that the ILO would provide the support needed and assist workers and employers.

The Government member of Switzerland noted that the question of forced labour for picking cotton among children in Uzbekistan was still being raised by international bodies and civil society. It was unfortunate that the Committee should once again have to examine this case and that so little progress had been made since 2011. The disparity between the country’s legislation and the facts on the ground was flagrant. Her Government therefore called on the Government to take urgent steps to bring the actual situation into line with the law. She emphasized that it was very difficult for people in the cotton supply chain to comply with legal requirements if the Government itself forced children to take part in the harvesting. The fact that legal action had been taken against several national contact points regarding their compliance with the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development’s (OECD) Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises in their dealings with Uzbek cotton merchants spoke for itself. The Government was strongly urged to accept a tripartite observation mission in the near future and was encouraged to issue a general authorization for all competent actors involved to conduct checks on the cotton harvest.

The Worker member of Turkmenistan referred to close cooperation with Uzbekistan and indicated that a package of measures had been applied to ensure the elimination of the worst forms of child labour. The national legislation prohibited forced labour, and all collective agreements contained chapters on minimum age and the prohibition of the worst forms of child labour. In order to ensure fully the effective monitoring and application of standards, it was necessary to have in place a mechanism of social monitoring by trade unions. Since the trade unions in Uzbekistan were very active at the local, national and central levels, they could provide assistance in this regard. Considering all of the above, it was thus justified to remove Uzbekistan from the list of individual cases to be discussed by the Committee.

The Government member of Turkmenistan welcomed the efforts made by the Government to apply the Convention, as evidenced by the fact that its legislation was fully in line with the Convention and that a national mechanism for monitoring compliance with legislation on child labour had been introduced. The Government had taken effective steps to eliminate the worst forms of child labour, not only in the cotton sector but also with respect to a wide range of illicit activities. In addition, the 12 years of compulsory schooling provided by the country’s education system represented another major success in avoiding the use of child labour. His Government further welcomed the increased cooperation between the Government and the ILO. Joint seminars had been held, and technical assistance provided, to incorporate ILO Conventions into domestic legislation. He also observed that the activities of workers’ and employers’ representative organizations to safeguard the rights of workers and children had intensified. Based on the above, he requested that the Committee should not continue its consideration of the application of the Convention by Uzbekistan at its current session.

A representative of the European Union, speaking on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its Member States, as well as Croatia, Iceland, Montenegro, Serbia, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Norway, reiterated their strong condemnation of the use of forced child labour and asked governments to make all efforts to eliminate such phenomenon. While having noted the Order issued by the Prime Minister in August 2012, and the concrete progress registered last year as regards the use of child labour during the cotton harvest, they called on the Government to firmly lock in and build upon this progress this year and in the years ahead. They remained seriously concerned with the persistent use of child labour among children above 15 years of age, often in conditions that could be hazardous work, and with the continued failure by the Government to fully implement the Convention. They urged the Government to resolutely step up its efforts towards implementing the Convention by re-engaging with the ILO on a broad-based, time-bound and long-term cooperation programme with a view to eradicating child labour in the cotton sector. The Government should take all appropriate measures for its cooperation agenda with the ILO to be set up in good time for the forthcoming cotton harvest. A sustainable solution to the child labour issue was essential if the efforts that the Government was putting in its health and education sector were to be really successful.

The Employer member of Turkmenistan expressed the view that the Government had implemented a broad package of measures to combat the worst forms of child labour, including legislative measures which were implemented in the framework of a plan of action actively involving workers and employers, and the establishment of an educational system with 12 years of compulsory education, covering all children up to 18 years of age. She considered that the Government was willing and ready to fulfil its obligations, which was further confirmed by the technical seminars that had been held with the participation of the social partners and the technical assistance that had been received, including by organizations specializing in the protection of the rights of the child. It was therefore necessary to discontinue the consideration of the application of the Convention by the Government in the Committee.

The Worker member of the Russian Federation, taking note of the Government’s willingness to engage in dialogue, considered that the discrepancy in the information available was a source of concern, the violations of the Convention were unacceptable and that the Government should put an immediate stop to them. As for the information the Government had recently submitted, he said that the existence of numerous measures aimed at eliminating the worst forms of child labour constituted a de facto recognition of the phenomenon. The measures taken by the trade unions for monitoring and follow-up should be backed up by experts in order to increase their effectiveness. Further, he recalled that Uzbekistan was one of the few countries of the region that had not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87). In this regard, the willingness expressed by the Government to cooperate with the ILO should cover a wide range of questions including the said Convention. In the area of the eradication of child labour, the cooperation with the ILO should not be limited to strengthening capacities, but should equally allow for the monitoring by the ILO itself, as well as the involvement of the social partners in a more active manner. He further deplored that the activities of the IPEC programme had to be interrupted and considered that the ILO should be involved at the local level in the preparation of scheduled meetings and activities in the country relating to child labour. Deeply regretting that the ILO had not received the authorization to undertake a visit in the country during the cotton harvest, he expressed the hope that a technical mission would take place in the near future, allowing for the preparation of a tripartite high-level mission.

The Government member of Azerbaijan stated that his Government noted with satisfaction the measures taken by the Government to address the issues regarding the application of the Convention. The national plans and programmes that had been adopted were steps in the right direction, including the National Action Plan adopted in 2008, the resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers adopted in 2012 “On additional measures for implementation in 2012–13 of the Convention concerning forced or compulsory labour and the Convention concerning the prohibition and immediate action for the elimination of the worst forms of child labour”, and the monitoring exercises conducted in 2012. Since the Government had taken all necessary measures for complying with the requirements of the Convention, the examination of this case by the Committee should be discontinued.

The Worker member of Belarus, while noting the concern expressed by the workers’ representatives of several countries, wished to highlight the positive aspects of the case. Firstly, the Government was continuing its dialogue with the international organizations, such as the ILO and UNICEF, and was committed to finding a solution to the problem and, secondly, the country’s unions were making considerable efforts to combat child labour and to follow up measures in that area. During a visit to Uzbekistan, the trade unions of Belarus had been able to observe the steps taken by the social partners to end child labour. If the Government continued its efforts, especially in sectors other than family enterprises, it was moving in the right direction and the positive measures it had already taken should be noted.

The Government member of Sri Lanka stated that, since ratifying the Convention in 2008, the Government of Uzbekistan had taken remedial measures and effective initiatives to implement the provisions of the Convention in law and in practice, including adopting regulations in 2009 on hazardous forms of employment specifying the conditions for the employment of minors which took into account the requirements of the Convention; establishing a special working group; and adopting a programme for local monitoring of the prohibition of forcing students to take part in the cotton harvest. A number of programmes had also been implemented to raise awareness among stakeholders. Her Government appreciated these initiatives, which indicated that the Government was fully committed and willing to achieve the objectives of the Convention. She called upon the Government to continue such initiatives with the close collaboration of the employers and the trade unions and requested the ILO to extend its fullest cooperation and support in terms of technical assistance to the Government.

The Employer member of Belarus emphasized that numerous measures had been taken by the Government. Child labour was prohibited by law and in the Constitution. Moreover, due to ILO technical assistance, a monitoring system had been introduced, and, in 2012, no cases of child labour had been identified. Furthermore, the best means of solving the problem of child labour in the agricultural sector would be to increase mechanization in that sector. He considered that the case should no longer appear in the list of cases discussed by the Committee.

The Worker member of Brazil stated that, even though the legislation prohibited the use of children in hazardous activities, UNICEF had observed that children between 11 and 17 years of age, and even some under 10 years of age, were used in the cotton harvest – a harvest that was planned by the public authorities and employers. Children were withdrawn from the education system as a result, and their work constituted a violation of the Convention and impacted their childhood. The situation should also be examined in the context of the application of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), and the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105), which prohibited the imposition of work to which no consent had been given. Despite the gravity of the situation, the Government systematically refused to avail itself of ILO technical assistance or to accept the participation of trade unions in the process of combating child labour. Progress had been made in Brazil in combating child labour where, between 2004 and 2009, 1 million children and young persons had been removed from labour. Such progress had been possible due to joint action by the Government and workers, and with the technical assistance of the Office. A high-level mission should be set up to investigate this deplorable situation.

The Government member of the Russian Federation recalled that the concern of the international community regarding recourse to child labour in Uzbekistan had not been reduced and that the solution to such a problem could only be found through continued dialogue. His Government was appreciative of the Government of Uzbekistan’s readiness to pursue its efforts. A certain amount of progress had been achieved, including the inter-ministerial working group, and a series of seminars and awareness-raising events organized with the participation of the ILO. However, he called attention to the fact that the written information, as well as the statement by the Government representative, did not answer the questions raised by the Committee of Experts or the Worker and Employer members. The data that had just been provided by the Worker and Employer members contradicted the information provided by the Government. The Government should, therefore, cooperate more closely in order to improve compliance with the Convention and to detect illegal employment of children, particularly in the most hazardous occupations. The Government should provide more information which would help allay the concerns of the international competent bodies, and the situation concerning child labour in the country should continue to be monitored by the ILO supervisory machinery in the context of the existing procedures.

The Government member of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela welcomed the measures taken by the Government, which his Government considered represented progress in the area of child labour. Furthermore, the country had various legislative and constitutional provisions prohibiting forced labour and the employment of children under 18 in hazardous work, including provisions expressly prohibiting children from being employed in work connected with the cotton harvest. His Government was confident that all of the measures taken were having, and would continue to have, a positive effect on the total eradication of all those practices that had been denounced as violating the Convention. The Government had committed itself to that aim and had satisfied its commitment with the participation of the ILO in a seminar held in May 2012 and the organization of a round table planned for the end of 2013. The Committee’s conclusions should highlight the progress that the Government had made and encourage it to continue down that path.

The Government member of Canada indicated that his Government shared the concerns of the Committee of Experts regarding the continued use of forced labour and of children for hazardous work in the cotton harvest in Uzbekistan. Even though the Government reported that no child labour was used in the cotton harvest, the awareness-raising and preventive measures it had reportedly undertaken tacitly pointed to a recognition that this practice continued. There was a lack of transparency and information available on the impact of measures taken towards the prohibition of forced and hazardous child labour, and persons seeking to monitor the harvest had found the fields patrolled by police and experienced harassment and intimidation. While noting reports that the Government had scaled back the forced labour of younger children during the most recent harvest, he recalled that the Convention was applicable to all children under the age of 18, while the continued forced use of youths and public servants in the harvest was also a serious issue. The speaker added that, despite reassuring statements, it had still not been clearly demonstrated that policy and legislative measures had been fully implemented or had had concrete effects on the eradication of the worst forms of child labour. The Government was therefore asked to comply with the requests of the Committee of Experts for information on the concrete impact of the measures taken to monitor the prohibition of forced and hazardous child labour, and on the number and nature of violations detected specifically in regard to the mobilization of children under 18 to work in the cotton harvest. The policies and laws which had been put into place by the Government constituted progress, but momentum towards the full implementation of these measures should continue. The Government was urged to accept the ILO’s recommendation for a high-level tripartite mission to observe the cotton harvest and to work with the ILO to strengthen the enforcement of forced labour and child labour laws to fully meet the requirements of the Convention.

The Government member of Thailand observed that the Government had cooperated fully with the Committee on child labour issues and expressed his Government’s satisfaction with the country’s consistent implementation of, and commitment to, the National Plan of Action in this area. The Government was to be commended for the creation of state institutions, mechanisms and regulations to eliminate the worst forms of child labour, including the Special Commission on Affairs of Minors, parliamentary hearings, Cabinet resolutions, state inspection of violations, ministerial regulations prohibiting dangerous and difficult working conditions, and related social programmes implemented nationwide. The speaker indicated that the Joint Statement issued by the Association of Farmers of Uzbekistan, the Council of the Federation of Trade Unions and the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, that virtually all cotton was harvested by farm owners who had no interest in making extensive use of children for the harvesting of cotton, was a further positive sign. His Government called upon the Government to pursue its efforts for the eradication of hazardous working conditions for children under 18 years of age and reiterated the readiness of his Government to lend support to ensure the protection of the rights of the child in Uzbekistan in accordance with international human rights obligations.

An observer representing Education International (EI) stated that the information collected independently by international and local non-governmental organizations showed that State-sponsored forced labour remained serious, systematic and continuous. Children, mostly aged 15 to 17 but some as young as 10, were forced to pick cotton under threat of punishment, including expulsion from school. Teachers were forced to pick cotton and supervise the quotas. Conservative figures estimated that up to half a million middle- and high school students were involved in the 2012 cotton harvest. This 2012 involvement of schoolchildren in the cotton harvesting was witnessed in at least three regions: Kashkadarya, Samarkand and Andijan. As in previous years, by November, most middle- and high school students had begun studying, although the academic year started in September. With an estimated 60 per cent of teachers forced to pick cotton, pupils received partial lessons for two months, and the remaining teachers, not in the fields themselves, had to manage combined classes of 50 to 60 children. Teachers were required to produce false documentation of subjects covered that were not actually dealt with, and to assess the students on them. EI was of the view that the Committee should request the Government to adopt a time-bound programme to end the practice of forced labour in accordance with the Convention and Conventions Nos 29 and 105 on forced labour, and to invite a high-level ILO tripartite observation mission to conduct unrestrained monitoring during the 2013 cotton harvest. The Committee’s conclusions should appear in a special paragraph of its report given the serious and systematic nature of the violations.

The Government member of Belarus noted the responsible approach of the Government to ensure compliance with its international obligations and drew particular attention to the adoption of the national action plan, the strengthening of the legislative framework – especially the increase in the minimum age for employment to 16 and the introduction of sanctions – and the regular submission of reports on the measures in place. The Government should be encouraged and supported in its efforts, and international dialogue and cooperation should be allowed to continue without further intervention on the part of the ILO’s supervisory bodies.

The Worker member of Indonesia expressed deep concern about the situation of child labour in Uzbekistan. In a country which figured as third in the world in terms of cotton exports, and among the most important producers of cotton in the world, a state-run system of child labour was a major violation of the Convention. The issue of child labour could not be considered only as a national problem in view of increasing globalization and international supply chains in the textile industry. Consumer countries should also be concerned about the massive abuse of children in the cotton fields of Uzbekistan, since children who were forced to work during the cotton harvest were the beginning of the supply chain leading to other countries and consumers all over the world. The speaker referred to Indonesia’s experience with regard to technical cooperation received in the area of freedom of association and the elimination of the worst forms of child labour and expressed the view that, with ILO assistance, effective programmes could be set up and the eradication of the worst forms of child labour was possible. A high-level tripartite mission with ILO–IPEC involvement would be an important first step towards a successful solution and should be the starting point for further technical assistance.

The Government member of the United States stated that her Government remained seriously concerned about the systematic and persistent use of forced labour and the worst forms of child labour in cotton production in Uzbekistan. Referring to the Prime Minister’s decree of July 2012 barring participation of children under 15 in the harvest, she noted that there had been a decline in the number of children under the age of 15 who were compelled to work in the 2012 cotton harvest, but children between 15 and 18 years of age continued to be forced to work in cotton production. There were also credible reports that children were compelled to work under conditions that endangered their safety and health. The speaker further noted that the mass mobilization of labour for the annual cotton harvest also included adult forced labour, which gave rise to serious concern not only about the application of the Convention, but also Convention No. 105, which prohibited the use of forced or compulsory labour for purposes of economic development. Her Government deeply regretted that the Government had resisted accepting ILO assistance in determining on the ground whether the cotton harvest was conducted in compliance with international labour standards. Referring to the Committee of Experts’ comment that there was an “evident contradiction” between the Government’s position that children were not compelled to work in the cotton harvest, and the concerns expressed by numerous UN bodies, employers’ and workers’ organizations, and non-governmental organizations, she noted that there were justifiable reasons for concern and that the stated legal and policy situation did not match actual practice. The ILO was uniquely qualified, and the only international organization with the specific mandate, to judge the facts and analyse the concrete impact of the measures indicated by the Government. The Government could be confident that ILO monitoring activities would be transparent and objective, and would provide the Government with an opportunity to work collaboratively with the ILO to verify facts and resolve implementation gaps. Her Government called for urgency and a serious approach to address the practical implementation of ILO Conventions, and strongly urged the Government to respond positively to the call for ILO monitoring of the 2013 cotton harvest, and to ensure that those involved in the monitoring had full freedom of movement and timely access to all situations and all relevant parties.

The Worker member of Germany expressed serious concern about the violations of the Convention in Uzbekistan. Approximately 1.5 million children under the age of 18 were forced to work in cotton plantations. There was still a State-controlled system of child labour under which children, who were the most vulnerable, were coerced into the fields because principals, teachers and public officials had to meet harvest quotas. In a most worrying development, the annual cotton harvest from September to November used not only children but also, according to reports from non-governmental organizations, adult teachers, doctors, nurses and other public servants. A system of State-organized child labour could, under no circumstances, be replaced by a national system of forced labour. A situation of schools without school children should not lead to a situation of schools without teachers or hospitals without doctors and nurses. These abusive practices in connection with the cotton harvest often led to the tragic death of young persons. The speaker appealed to the Government to accept an ILO high-level tripartite mission which, along with an effective monitoring of compliance with the Convention, would help to build confidence and lay the foundations for further technical cooperation.

The Government member of China highlighted that the Government had taken effective measures to apply the Convention, in particular by setting the compulsory schooling age at 12 years, increasing the minimum age for work, setting up an inter-ministerial working group, sentencing offenders and participating in ILO technical assistance activities. These positive achievements should be recognized by the Committee, and the international community should continue to cooperate with it in its fight against poverty and in its efforts to strengthen national capacity so as to ensure the effective application of the Convention.

The Government member of Kenya noted the Government’s commitments to review labour legislation concerning child labour, as well as the fact that the Government cooperated with the social partners in this endeavour. He further noted the monitoring mechanisms in place and the training and advocacy initiatives that the Government had undertaken. There had been progress and the Government should be encouraged to continue its efforts to further improve compliance.

The Government member of Cuba referring to the National Plan for the implementation of the Convention and Convention No. 138, stated that the Government had spared no effort to prevent child labour. The Constitution contained a provision prohibiting child labour and criminal legislation made it an offence for people to involve minors in illegal activities. There was also a list of occupations that children under 18 were prohibited from undertaking. Furthermore, the Government participated in activities and mechanisms to monitor child labour, along with seminars and campaigns to raise awareness among the social partners, local administrations and international organizations. The speaker underlined the Government’s readiness to engage in dialogue with all interested parties and her Government called for further technical cooperation between the Government and the ILO to ensure effective application of the Convention.

The Government member of Indonesia took note of the positive developments in the implementation of the Convention, including putting into place a national monitoring mechanism to prevent illegal child labour, as well as programmes to eliminate the worst forms of child labour. The challenge to eliminate child labour could not be denied, and his Government hoped that the Government would continue to take the necessary steps including technical cooperation with the ILO, which was necessary in this matter.

The Government member of the Islamic Republic of Iran welcomed the positive developments to ensure the full application of the Convention, as well as a new series of constructive initiatives adopted by the Government towards eliminating the worst forms of child labour and the constant monitoring of child labour. The constructive and well-targeted collaboration with UNICEF had enabled the strengthening of child education capacities and helped implement the provisions of the Convention. His Government urged the ILO to collaborate fully with the Government and ensure it received full technical cooperation necessary for the fair and final elimination of all forms of child labour.

The Government member of India appreciated the efforts made by the Government to eliminate child labour. Among the positive steps, he noted the plan of additional measures for the implementation of Conventions Nos 29 and 182 for the period 2012–13, the 2011 “Joint Statement concerning the inadmissibility of using forced child labour in agricultural works” adopted by the Association of Farmers of Uzbekistan, the Council of the Federation of Trade Unions and the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection as well as the operationalization of the hotline on child labour issues throughout the country. He also noted the establishment of an inter-ministerial working group which was headed by the First Deputy Minister of Labour and Social Protection, and was made up of representatives of the Council of the Federation of Trade Unions, the Chamber of Commerce and Industry and key ministries. The resolution adopted by the Cabinet of Ministers on additional measures in 2012–13 for implementation of the Convention indicated the good intent of the Government. His Government firmly believed that the dialogue and cooperation alone would help in resolving the outstanding issues. His Government considered that the examination of this case by the Committee should be discontinued.

The Government member of Egypt commended the Government on its efforts, especially its reinforcement of the legislative framework and its development of the education and training system, which had done much to eliminate the worst forms of child labour. The Government should also be commended on the steps it had taken to ensure the sustainable development of the economy. It should be encouraged to continue along that path and to take advantage of the assistance that the ILO could provide in the area of job creation and social welfare. His Government requested that the case no longer be placed on the Committee’s agenda.

The Government representative referred to the manner in which his opening statement had been interpreted, including one paragraph which had not been translated into English that had included among the Government’s priorities cooperation with the ILO concerning the implementation of the Convention, which involved the question of monitoring the cotton harvest in the forthcoming autumn. However, the Worker and Employer members continued to see everything painted in black. The speaker quoted a passage from a UNICEF report, which took into account the outcome of monitoring exercises carried out by UNICEF in 2012, in which investigations confirmed that in all 13 regions none of the 3.5 million pupils were obliged to participate in the harvest. His Government did not understand why this UNICEF report was never sent to the ILO or to the Committee of Experts. Referring to the conclusions of the UNICEF report, he stated that progress was recognized, both in the report and by several Government members who had participated in the discussion, but neither the Committee of Experts nor the Worker and Employer members took note of that progress. The World Bank had commented on the extremely high level of literacy in Uzbekistan, and the Director of the World Health Organization had praised the results of reforms in the health sector and the decreasing child mortality rate. As regards the cooperation with the ILO, his Government had proposed a round table to clarify the situation, but this proposal had not been accepted. His Government further suggested that a long-term cooperation plan could include monitoring the cotton harvest. Those Governments that were prepared to support Uzbekistan’s efforts were thanked because children were their greatest treasure.

The Worker members emphasized that the Government had carried out many awareness-raising and prevention activities, which suggested that it acknowledged, at least implicitly, that the mobilization of children for the cotton harvest was a reality in the country. However, the Government did not supply any information on the specific results of monitoring activities. The Worker members considered that the Government’s proposal to set up a round table was not sufficient inasmuch as it did not provide for the possibility of observing the situation on the ground. Hence, the Government should agree to receive a high-level monitoring mission which would evaluate the manner in which the Convention was applied, particularly in cotton plantations at harvest time. Pending a positive reply from the Government, the case should be included once again in a special paragraph of the Committee’s report.

The Employer members noted all of the steps the Government had taken and continued to take with a view to meeting its obligations under the Convention, including the legal provisions, government orders, seminars and penalties. The Employer members did not disagree with the view that the Government was on the right path – as one Government member had put it – but being on a path meant that the Government had not yet reached the goal of full compliance with the Convention. It was clear that, while the Government might be making progress, forced labour was still occurring. In addition to a lack of openness, the Government had not produced any factual data but made only statements. The Employer members were under the impression that the Government was willing to allow the ILO to observe the 2013 harvest, which, if confirmed, would be a positive development. Echoing the statement of the Worker members, the Employer members agreed that the Government should accept a high-level monitoring mission and also that the Committee’s conclusions should be placed in a special paragraph of its report.

Conclusions

The Committee took note of the oral and written information provided by the Government representative and the discussion that followed.

The Committee noted the issues raised by the IOE and the ITUC relating to the systematic mobilization of children by the State in the cotton harvest, including the extensive use of labour of teenagers, young persons and adults in all regions of the country, as well as the substantial negative impact of this practice on the health and education of school-aged children obliged to participate in the cotton harvest.

The Committee noted the information provided by the Government outlining the laws and policies put in place to combat the forced labour of, and hazardous work by, children. This included the order issued by the Prime Minister in August 2012 banning the use of children under 15 and the adoption of a plan of additional measures for the implementation of Conventions Nos 29 and 182 in 2012, including measures to maintain monitoring for the prevention of forced child labour. The Committee also noted the Government’s statement that it had established a tripartite Inter-Ministerial Working Group with a view to developing specific programmes and actions aimed at fulfilling Uzbekistan’s obligations under ILO Conventions. Lastly, the Committee noted the Government’s statement that the use of compulsory labour was punishable with penal and administrative sanctions and that, in this regard, concrete measures were being taken by the Labour Inspectorate officials to prosecute persons for violations of labour legislation.

The Committee noted the information from the Government, as well as other sources, that as a result of the measures taken, school children under 15 years of age had not been mobilized during the cotton harvest in 2012. It nevertheless observed with serious concern information provided by several speakers, including representatives of governments and the social partners, that school children between the ages of 16 and 18 continued to be mobilized for work during the cotton harvest. The Committee reminded the Government that the forced labour of, or hazardous work by, all children under 18 constituted one of the worst forms of child labour. It therefore urged the Government to take the necessary measures, as a matter of urgency, to ensure the effective implementation of national legislation prohibiting compulsory labour and hazardous work for all children below the age of 18.

The Committee noted the Government’s indication that it was willing to engage in broad technical cooperation with the ILO, which would consist of awareness-raising measures and capacity building of the national social partners and various stakeholders, and would also include monitoring of the 2013 cotton harvest with ILO–IPEC technical assistance. In this regard, the Committee requested the Government to accept an ILO high-level monitoring mission during the 2013 cotton harvest, that would have full freedom of movement and timely access to all situations and relevant parties, including in the cotton fields, in order to enable the Committee of Experts to assess the implementation of the Convention at its 2013 Session. Noting the Government’s statement that it would be amenable to the terms of reference put forward by the ILO in this respect, the Committee urged the Government to pursue its efforts to undertake, in the very near future, a round-table discussion with the ILO, UNDP, UNICEF, the European Commission and the representatives of national and international organizations of workers and employers

The Committee requested the Government to include in its report to the Committee of Experts, due in 2013, comprehensive information on the manner in which the Convention was applied in practice, including, in particular, enhanced statistical data on the number of children working in agriculture, their age, gender, and information on the number and nature of contraventions reported and penalties applied. The Committee expressed the hope that it would be able to note tangible progress in the very near future.

The Committee decided to include its conclusions in a special paragraph of the report.

The Government representative stated that this Committee was starting to get used to the discussions on this case and he therefore wished to raise some points with regard to the conclusions that had been adopted. While acknowledging the importance of broad technical cooperation to implement fundamental ILO Conventions, he recalled the organization of a forthcoming round table on the “Prospects of technical cooperation on the implementation of international obligations of Uzbekistan within the ILO framework” this year in Tashkent. On this occasion, representatives would be invited from the ILO Office in Moscow and Geneva, the European Commission, international organizations such as UNICEF and the UNDP, and foreign representatives of workers and employers, as well as interested national ministries and members of Parliament and representatives of non-governmental organizations of Uzbekistan. The round table would review all aspects of broad-based technical cooperation on the Convention, including the issue of monitoring during the cotton harvest period, and would be based on tripartite consultation and dialogue. It would also focus on enhancing the capacity to protect social and labour rights and prospects of ratification of ILO Conventions. However, he expressed his Government’s disagreement with the issues raised by the IOE and the ITUC regarding the systematic mobilization of children by the State in the cotton harvest, including the extensive use of labour of teenagers. His Government also disagreed with the decision to include the conclusions on this case in a special paragraph of the report of this Committee.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2011, Publication: 100th ILC session (2011)

A Government representative pointed out that the legal basis for the prohibition of the worst forms of child labour had been established and was being continually improved. He recalled that protection against unacceptable forms of child labour was based on the following legislation: the Constitution, which prohibited the use of any form of forced labour; the Act on Guarantees of the Rights of the Child, which regulated the work of persons under 18 years of age, allowing them to combine work and study; the Labour Code which set the minimum age for admission to employment at 16 years (in exceptional cases at 15 years with the authorization of the child’s parents or guardians); the Administrative Responsibility Code, which provided for substantial fines for employers who committed violations of labour legislation on the use of child labour; the Act to supplement the Administrative Responsibility Code, which was adopted to punish those who bought or sold, or carried out any other transaction with regard to a minor, as well as those who exploited, recruited, transferred, delivered, concealed or carried out any other act for the purpose of exploiting a child and involving a child in any form of illegal activity; and the Act on the prevention of child neglect and juvenile delinquency, which was adopted on 29 September 2010. He recalled that, in order to implement the Committee of Experts’ recommendations, an Inter-ministerial Working Group was established by Cabinet of Ministers decision of 25 March 2011, which was chaired by the First Deputy Minister of Labour and Social Protection, and included senior officials of the Council of the Federation of Trade Unions of Uzbekistan, the Chamber of Commerce and Industry, as well as the Ministries of Foreign Affairs, Justice, Internal Affairs, Education, Higher and Secondary Specialized Education and Health, the National Human Rights Centre, the Women’s Committee, the non-governmental youth organization “Kamolot” and farmers’ associations. The main tasks and objectives of the Inter-ministerial Working Group were the following: coordinating the activity of the relevant ministries, departments and organizations concerned with regard to the implementation of the measures, programmes and plans adopted pursuant to ILO Conventions; developing programmes and action aimed at complying with obligations under ILO Conventions; carrying out the necessary awareness-raising activities on the content and meaning of the ILO Conventions applied in Uzbekistan; liaising with international organizations on matters relating to education, health care, labour, employment, social protection and social and labour legislation. In April and May 2011, the Inter-ministerial Working Group decided on the development of measures aimed at fulfilling Uzbekistan’s obligations under ILO Conventions and updating the measures under the National Plan of Action, and approved updated reports on the application of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) and Convention No. 182, as well as the information on non-ratified ILO Conventions. He further recalled that Uzbekistan was implementing a single National Programme for Training Managers, and that since 2009 it had introduced compulsory schooling for 12 years, this being a crucial factor in preventing child labour and eradicating its worst forms. Referring to recent data on, amongst others, the literacy rate, economic growth, job creation, average wages and state expenditure on social protection in Uzbekistan, he stressed that, as ILO experts had noted, the economic reforms undertaken in Uzbekistan had ensured stable economic growth, improved the level of employment, and improved incomes for families. These constituted an important precondition for reducing child labour in the country. As regards strengthening monitoring of compliance with ratified ILO Conventions, he stated that the practice of parliamentary monitoring was being introduced; an integrated policy document for the development and improvement of national monitoring of the rights of the child was being implemented with the assistance of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF); the Government Order of 19 February 2010, extended the powers of the labour inspectorate, which was authorized to suspend the activities of undertakings not found to be in conformity with labour legislation and to initiate administrative proceedings against persons responsible for contraventions. He added that concrete measures were being taken to prosecute people for violations of labour legislation: the labour inspectorate in 2010 had recorded around 10,000 contraventions of labour laws and regulations during hiring and employment; some 829 compliance orders (orders to rectify contraventions) were issued, and administrative action was taken against 782 managers and officials, with fines totalling 75 million Sumy (UZS). He further pointed out that Uzbekistan was collaborating with the ILO and the social partners in implementing the Decent Work Country Programme.

The Employer members stressed that the worst forms of child labour was a chronic problem in agriculture. The Conference Committee conclusions last year highlighted the systematic and persistent use of forced labour in the cotton fields of Uzbekistan for up to three months every year, as well as the substantial negative impact of this practice on the health and education of school aged children obliged to participate in the cotton harvest. In particular, although various legal statutes prohibited forced labour and hazardous types of work for children, the legislation did not prevent child labour in the cotton harvest from occurring. It was not sufficient to have laws: such laws and the Constitution should be effective and enforced as required by Article 7(1) of Convention No. 182. As noted by the Committee of Experts in its 2010 observation, there was a convergence of allegations and broad consensus among the United Nations bodies, the representative organizations of employers and workers and nongovernmental organizations, regarding the continued practice of mobilizing schoolchildren for work in the cotton harvest. Not all of these organizations’ assessment of the situation could be wrong. According to the Government’s report of 7 June 2010, an interdepartmental working group was established, and a programme approved, for on-the-ground monitoring to prevent the use of forced labour by schoolchildren during the cotton harvest. This seemed to be an implicit and tacit admission that child labour occurred. Since the last meeting with the Government last year, there had been numerous credible reports of child labour in the cotton harvest from September to October 2010. Contrary to the Government’s statements, these children were supervised by their teachers, not their parents. Police and security patrolled the cotton fields in an effort to prevent observation by human rights groups and journalists, and at least one human rights activist was expelled from the country for observing the cotton harvest. The Employer members questioned the transparency of the Government: while last year the Conference Committee had urged the Government to accept an ILO high-level tripartite observer mission that would have full freedom of movement and timely access to all situations and relevant parties, including the cotton fields, the Government by inaction appeared to have rejected this conclusion. The Employer members suggested that the Government reconsider this option.

The Worker members recalled that the Convention had been adopted in 1999 with the aim of combating those inhumane and unacceptable situations, and as such constituted a relatively new instrument. The case under examination concerned the use of (often very young) children for work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it was carried out, was hazardous. The examination of the case this year, after an examination by this Committee in 2010, had been requested by the Committee of Experts on the “double footnote” basis. The Committee of Experts had initially examined the issues related to the forced or compulsory labour of children in cotton production and in hazardous work governed by Articles 3 and 7(1) of the Convention. Denunciation of the systematic and persistent use of the forced labour of children in the cotton fields was widespread and well documented. It involved the confederation of trade unions of Uzbekistan, the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) and other non-governmental and media organizations. Since the ratification of the Convention in 2008 and the communication of the Government’s first report, the Committee of Experts had noted serious problems relating to compliance with the Convention. Every year between 0.5 and 1.5 million schoolchildren were forced by the Government to work in the national cotton harvest for periods of up to three months. The latest figures available concerned the 2009 harvest; it had not been possible to obtain accurate and reliable data on the current situation. The situation involved hazardous work prohibited by the Convention which prevented the children from attending school during the harvest period. It also gave rise to serious health problems resulting from the harsh climatic conditions and the carrying of heavy loads, such as intestinal and respiratory infections and cases of meningitis and hepatitis. Neutral and credible international bodies such as UNICEF, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women and the UN Human Rights Committee had also expressed their concern regarding the seasonal mobilization of vast numbers of children for the cotton harvest. At the same time, it was worrying to observe that the Government seemed unwilling to recognize the gravity of the situation, stating that it was traditional practice for the oldest children to help with the family business. In practice, the situation in question affected very young children (9, 10, 11 years of age and older), who worked under harsh conditions which posed a threat to their life and health, conditions that were covered by the Convention. It was therefore to be hoped that the Government would understand that it had an obligation, as established by the Convention, to take immediate and effective measures to ensure the elimination, as a matter of urgency, of the worst forms of child labour, and ensure the effective application of the Convention through monitoring and penal sanctions. The Committee of Experts had also examined the surveillance mechanisms and the programmes of action aimed at eliminating the worst forms of child labour covered by Articles 5 and 6 of the Convention. It observed that the Government had adopted a National Plan of Action for the application of the Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138) and Convention No. 182 comprising measures to combat the forced labour of children and also a resolution concerning measures for the application of these Conventions in the education system. The Government had taken initiatives to inform and raise the awareness of farmers and to collaborate with the UNICEF Child Protection Programme. Nevertheless, it still lacked specific, detailed information on the impact of the national plan of action and the measures taken in that context. Without such data and the effective involvement of the labour inspectorate, the objective of reducing the number of children working in the cotton harvest was impossible to achieve since the phenomenon could not be evaluated. The inspectorate needed not only human and financial resources but also the means of monitoring the use of school-age children in the cotton harvest. The Committee of Experts had underlined the lack of communicated data required in the report form on the autumn 2010 harvest. However, having recourse to changes to the law was no guarantee that the law was effectively applied and monitored and that penalties were imposed in relation to it, or that the application thereof would be the subject of consultations with the local social partners and other representatives of civil society recognized by the latter. The Worker members recalled that they had wanted to show confidence in the Government the previous year by inviting it to demonstrate its total political will without delay by agreeing to receive a high-level ILO tripartite observer mission having full freedom of movement and timely access to all situations and relevant parties, including in the cotton fields. To date, the Government had yet to agree to the mission. To show its serious intent, therefore, the Government would have to undertake to report regularly by supplying recent, concrete and complete data. It would also have to accept the observer mission called for by the Committee the previous year and agree to or, better still, propose technical assistance. Finally, the Government should enter into a partnership with the ILO’s International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC).

The Worker member of Uzbekistan stated that the Government representative had objectively evaluated the Government’s effort in combating child labour. Child labour could be eliminated only by eliminating its causes – informal employment, unemployment, economic and family-related problems. Trade unions were among the first to bring the issue of child labour to public attention. In 2005, it called for the ratification of Conventions Nos 138 and 182. Following the ratification of these Conventions, trade unions had participated in the development of a national plan of action for their implementation. Out of 37 measures envisaged by this plan, 13 had been adopted upon trade unions’ initiative. These measures included a review of the “List of occupations with unfavourable working conditions in which it is forbidden to employ persons under 18 years of age”, review of regulations on lifting and carrying heavy loads, and awareness-raising among farmers. On 2 May 2011, the Federation of Trade Unions of Uzbekistan, the Association of Farmers, and the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection made a joint statement on the prohibition of child labour in the agricultural sector. The Administrative Responsibility Code had been amended so as to provide for the legal responsibility of officials and other persons for violating labour legislation concerning minors; for employing minors to perform work which could harm their health, safety or morals; as well as for forcing minors to perform work. Currently, a review of collective agreements was being undertaken with the aim of including provisions concerning protection of children’s rights, obliging employers to respect the minimum age for employment and prohibiting worst forms of child labour. In 2010, the monitoring of compliance with the Labour Code carried out by trade unions revealed 6,271 cases of violations, 197 of which concerned children under 18 years. The Federation of Trade Unions of Uzbekistan conducted information sessions and seminars for trade union activists throughout the county and, together with the Farmers’ Association, among farmers, to raise awareness regarding child labour. The source of child labour lay in the informal economy and family, where trade unions had no influence. In the formal sector, the problem of the worst forms of child labour did not exist. Some parents thought that it was better for their children to work than do nothing. There was nothing wrong with children helping their parents and making some pocket money. However, children were often being employed without a proper employment contract and without respecting requirements set forth by the legislation for children and adolescents concerning working hours and rest. Today, employers, parents and children should clearly understand the difference between child labour and vocational training. The Federation of Trade Unions of Uzbekistan would continue making the necessary efforts to ensure the full application of the Convention in the country.

The Government member of Hungary, speaking on behalf of the Governments of Member States of the European Union (EU) attending the Conference, as well as the candidate countries (Croatia, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro and Iceland) and potential candidate countries (Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia), Norway and the Republic of Moldova, reiterated serious concern about the systematic and persistent use of forced labour, including child labour during the cotton harvest in Uzbekistan. While taking note of the adoption of the Act on Guarantees of the Rights of the Child, of the relevant amendment to the Administrative Responsibility Code and of the Aide-memoire on the Application of the Convention sent by the Government, she noted with deep regret the recent conclusions of the Committee of Experts. This concern was supported by well-documented allegations and broad consensus among the United Nations bodies, UNICEF, the representative organizations of employers and workers and non-governmental organizations stating that, despite the legal commitments made by the Government to eradicate forced child labour, in practice, year after year an estimated number of 0.5 to 1.5 million school-aged children were still forced to take part in the hazardous work in the cotton harvest for up to three months each year. Whereas the Government had stated in its report that the allegations concerning widespread forced labour in agriculture were an unfounded attempt by foreign actors to undermine the reputation of Uzbek cotton in the global market, and that children were not involved in the cotton harvest as various legal provisions prohibit forced labour, she urged the Government to grant unrestricted access to independent monitors to document the cotton harvest and provide a clear picture of the situation in the country. A monitoring mission was one of the issues recently discussed by José Manuel Barroso, President of the European Commission at his meeting with President Islam Karimov in January 2010. While expressing concern that the Government did not invite the previously recommended high-level ILO tripartite observer mission despite the detailed discussions in the Conference Committee last year and the explicit request of the Committee, she strongly urged the Government to invite such a mission in good time for the 2011 harvest and provide it full freedom of movement and timely access to all situations and relevant parties, including in the cotton fields, in order to assess the actual implementation of the Convention. She further urged the Government of Uzbekistan to strengthen its efforts on this serious issue, to take immediate and effective measures to ensure the implementation of all aspects of the Convention, to carry out thorough investigations into allegations of such practices and to take robust action with regard to the prosecution of offenders.

The Government member of Switzerland stated that her Government associated itself with the statement made by the Government member of Hungary on behalf of the Member States of the European Union.

The Government member of Azerbaijan noted the positive measures taken by the Government of Uzbekistan, for instance the adoption of legislation in 2010 to prevent the exploitation of children, the establishment of the Inter-ministerial Working Group to monitor the implementation of ILO Conventions, and the 2011 decision to set up a specific programme for the eradication of child labour. He also recalled that new legislation was adopted in 2009 on compulsory education and his Government was of the view that all those measures would ultimately produce positive results for the elimination of the worst forms of child labour.

The Government member of the United States stated that her Government remained concerned that, notwithstanding the constitutional and legislative prohibitions against forced labour and child labour in Uzbekistan, there was reason to believe that many thousands of rural schoolchildren continued to be mobilized forcibly each autumn to harvest cotton under hazardous conditions. She echoed the concerns of UN bodies, employers’ and workers’ organizations, and non-governmental organizations, regarding this deeply rooted practice. Her Government urged the Government of Uzbekistan to implement its existing prohibitions on forced and child labour. She recalled that ILO high-level tripartite technical assistance could be instrumental in helping governments to develop and implement solutions for the effective and sustained application of ratified Conventions, and it was regrettable that last year’s recommendation for an ILO mission was not accepted by the Government. Her Government joined the other members in calling for the Government to invite an ILO observer mission that would have full freedom of movement and timely access to all information and relevant parties to assess the implementation of the Convention during the next cotton harvest.

The Government member of Canada stated that her Government welcomed the adoption of various legal provisions prohibiting forced labour and the engagement of children in hazardous work, but shared the concerns raised by the Committee of Experts that forced child labour continued to be practised in the cotton industry. This situation, and its negative impacts on the health and safety and education of children, had been raised by international workers’ and employers’ organizations and commented on by a number of UN bodies. Her Government was encouraged by the measures for implementation of Conventions Nos 138 and 182, undertaken by the Government under the National Programme of Action approved in 2008, and the joint resolution adopted in 2009, but expected more detailed information on the practical results of these initiatives. Her Government therefore urged the Government of Uzbekistan to accept a high-level tripartite observer mission and to work with the ILO to strengthen enforcement of forced labour and child labour laws to fully meet its obligations under the Convention.

The Worker member of the United States recalled that the 2010 cotton harvest had involved the use of child labour on a massive scale: more than 2 million schoolchildren aged between 10 and 16 years. He recalled that, by the time the 2010 harvest had ended, two months of schooling, mainly in rural areas, were effectively lost. The mobilization of this involuntary labour originated from the top and was transmitted through governors to school administrators. The harvest mobilization was overseen by government officials and police, while parents who refused to send their children to work reportedly faced economic sanctions such as the removal of welfare subsidies or the cutting off of gas and electricity. According to some accounts, children who failed to meet quotas, ranging previously from 15–75 kilos per day based on age, were beaten or humiliated. Security was employed throughout the region to prevent eyewitnesses from reporting abuses, while children and parents were instructed to deny that they were picking cotton. Children were reported to suffer from exhaustion and malnutrition. The speaker questioned the Government’s denial of the existence of statesponsored forced child labour and its statement that national programmes, commissions and other measures proposed or previously established were serious efforts to combat child labour in the cotton industry. He noted the broad consensus among all social partners, including the employers and workers, and governments, which were supported by reports from international and inter-governmental organizations, universities and human rights organizations, that state sponsored forced child labour in the cotton industry continued on a massive scale. He called for an ILO high-level tripartite mission with unrestricted and unsupervised access during the harvest season and expressed the view that if this mission were rejected by the Government, other measures should be considered to bring about quickly and completely the end of forced child labour.

The Government member of Turkmenistan stated that his Government welcomed the adoption of the National Action Plan for the implementation of ILO Conventions. The National Action Plan on Convention No. 182 set out specific measures to prevent child labour, monitor compliance and raise awareness, and provided training for employment agencies, media, trade unions and local administrations. The Government consistently carried out nationwide programmes for the protection of social and economic rights of children. National monitoring mechanisms had been incorporated into the Government administration from the highest to local government levels. The Government’s attention to child development was evidenced by the fact that 99 per cent of the population was literate. Uzbekistan had one of the strongest social systems, especially with respect to vulnerable families, large families and children in need. He therefore concluded that the examination of this case should be discontinued.

The Government member of Singapore noted the concrete steps taken by the Government of Uzbekistan to eliminate child labour, including efforts made in strengthening the legislative framework and enhancing the monitoring mechanism to prevent illegal child labour, increasing the penalties for violations of labour legislation and compulsory labour of persons under 18 years of age, and implementing targeted programmes including educational activities to raise awareness on the rights of the child. The Government had demonstrated its commitment to tackle the problems and to cooperate with international agencies, such as translating and publishing educational material on the elimination of child labour, in partnership with ILO–IPEC; and developing and implementing a concept of development and improvement of national monitoring of children’s rights in partnership with the UNICEF office in Uzbekistan, which contained the basic principles, goals, mechanisms and tools for monitoring children’s rights, including the right to work. However, her Government was of the view that there was still room for improvement, and encouraged Uzbekistan to continue its efforts to strengthen the effective implementation and enforcement of the various provisions prohibiting forced labour and the engagement of children in hazardous work. She stressed that the social partners and stakeholders had an important role to play in addressing these challenges in a comprehensive manner, and supported their involvement to collectively formulate effective implementation plans. Her Government considered that the Government of Uzbekistan had taken proactive and resolute steps to address the challenges of the elimination of child labour and concluded by stating that the Committee should offer further assistance to the Government to fulfil its obligations under the Convention.

The Government member of Cuba drew attention to the National Plan of Action that the Government had introduced to implement Conventions Nos 138 and 182, which contained 37 measures covering four fundamental areas: improving legislation, monitoring and follow-up, raising awareness of the Conventions, and implementing international cooperation projects. She emphasized that the Government was making great efforts to prevent child labour, including holding seminars and awareness-raising campaigns aimed at employment agencies, workers’ organizations and local authorities. Since 2008, there had been a telephone line for children and their relatives to report violations of their rights. She highlighted the constitutional prohibition of child labour, criminal legislation which laid down tough penalties for those who involved minors in illegal activities, and the list of prohibited occupations for children below 18 years of age. She stressed the Government’s willingness to engage in dialogue and cooperate with all interested parties in order to take steps with a view to strengthening the system of preventing child labour.

The Government member of Belarus emphasized that the Government had taken practical measures for the eradication of the worst forms of child labour, such as the adoption of a National Plan of Action and a monitoring system, the inclusion of the prohibition of forced labour in the Constitution and the adoption of legal provisions penalizing persons who exacted the worst forms of child labour. All of these measures demonstrated the will of the Government to honour the obligations deriving from the ratification of the Convention and the Committee should make a positive assessment of them.

The Worker member of Germany stated that there was no doubt that children aged 11 to 17 years were taken out of school and were forced to spend several months in the cotton harvest under physical, economic and social pressure. Experts and independent sources had provided reliable information that the parents did not have any possibility to escape the system of forced labour, and that the particular form of labour was dangerous for the children’s health. The situation could not be feasible without the active role of the Government. While some progress had been made at the legislative level, the situation remained unchanged on the ground. Forced child labour persisted in clear violation of Conventions Nos 138 and 182. It was unacceptable that school children were losing the precious opportunity to have an education, and their health was being threatened. The ILO should be given full access to the children and parents concerned. He therefore fully supported the suggestion for a high-level tripartite observer mission during the harvest season.

The Government member of the Russian Federation stated that the Constitution of Uzbekistan contained two articles that expressly prohibited child labour, and that new legislation had been adopted that raised the minimum working age, prohibited trafficking in children and included other provisions consistent with the Convention. His Government welcomed both the tripartite declaration stating that child labour was unacceptable and criminal sanctions for contracting under-age workers. He said that the National Plan of Action, which was supported by employers’ and workers’ organizations, made provision for updating legislation, conducting awareness-raising campaigns and carrying out specific projects. The Government’s actions should be welcomed, and cooperation between the ILO and the Government should be strengthened.

The Government member of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela stated that his Government welcomed the measures taken by the Government which had led to progress since discussions in the Committee the previous year. His Government also welcomed the fact that the Government of Uzbekistan had demonstrated its desire to work in cooperation with the Office. The Government should continue allocating 10 per cent of its gross domestic product to guaranteeing that the country’s children could enjoy education and health, and there was no doubt that it would continue to enhance its activities to ensure implementation of the Convention. The Government was continuing to make progress in applying the Convention, which the Committee should emphasize in its conclusions.

The Government member of Pakistan stated that his Government welcomed the measures taken by the Government of Uzbekistan, which represented elements of progress and should be noted with interest. The Government had shown cooperation by adopting legislation and administrative measures towards eradicating the worst forms of child labour. If needed, technical assistance should be provided by the ILO to help the Government overcome this problem and comply with its international obligations.

The Government member of China highlighted the Government’s positive attitude towards implementing Conventions Nos 138 and 182. He observed that proper measures were being taken, including the creation of labour systems and frameworks, and expressed support for the Government in its efforts to eradicate child labour from the country.

The Government representative thanked the Committee members for the positive assessment of the action taken by his Government to ensure the effective implementation of national legislation prohibiting compulsory labour and hazardous work for children. He indicated that the improvement of the legislative framework was a key element and that the Government would continue its efforts on matters such as the minimum age, compulsory education for 12 years or an adequate system of sanctions. He also stressed that the inspection services would be reinforced and that the Government was considering several measures for the elimination of all forms of child labour, including human trafficking, drug addiction and prostitution. He further stated that a special law on social partnership would be adopted shortly which would contain specific measures to address the situation of child labour.

Another Government representative recalled that only three years after the Convention had been ratified, significant progress had been made as regards the protection of children from hazardous work. His Government recognized that legislative conformity in itself was not enough and that practical implementation and effective monitoring were also needed. He also admitted past delays in reporting but pointed out that all available information had now been communicated to the Conference Committee. He felt that there was some mistrust regarding the information provided by the Government and strongly opposed the view that his Government was not concerned about the problem of child labour. This could not be true in a country where 40 per cent of the population was under 18 years of age. The ratification of the Convention alone proved the Government’s commitment to the protection of children and the enhancement of their personal and social development. He concluded by reaffirming that the fight against the worst forms of child labour remained high on the agenda of his Government, that collaboration with international organizations would continue and that building a constructive partnership was the best approach to address this issue.

The Employer members recalled that up to 2 million children worked in the cotton harvest each year, which made the situation acute because it involved children and their development during a crucial stage of their lives. They noted the positive closing statement made by the Government representative with respect to the harmonization of the national legislation with the Convention, the efforts to deal with all aspects of the worst forms of child labour, and the setting up of a system of monitoring. However, recalling that Committee members had frequently heard expressions of goodwill, only to find decades later that the issues were not resolved, the Employer members considered that the Government needed to be more transparent in these circumstances; this was why an observer mission had been proposed last year to assess the situation during the cotton harvest. They expressed support for all the steps proposed by the Worker members, including the need for timely reporting to the ILO, accepting an observer mission, accepting ILO technical assistance and collaborating with ILO–IPEC. Finally, the Employer members noted that this was a serious situation and asked that the conclusions of the Committee be included in a special paragraph of the Committee’s report.

The Worker members emphasized that, as could be seen from the information supplied, the Government had realized the necessity of acting to combat child labour and had taken measures in the areas of education and protecting childhood, as well as increasing criminal liability for those who flouted the prohibition of child labour. However, the Government did not seem disposed to recognize the gravity of the situation of thousands of children engaged in dangerous work harvesting cotton. It must therefore demonstrate its political will in that regard, without delay, and provide evidence that legislation adopted was being applied effectively. The Government should also demonstrate that the effect given to legislation would be the subject of consultations with the social partners and, where appropriate, with relevant non-governmental organizations that they recognized. The Worker members considered that taking the following measures would provide proof of the Government’s serious commitment: submitting reports containing recent and complete information; accepting a high-level tripartite observer mission, which would visit the country during the cotton harvest and would have complete freedom of movement, as proposed by the Committee the previous year; and accepting technical assistance and partnership with ILO–IPEC. To conclude, the Worker members accepted the proposal made by the Employer members to include this case in a special paragraph of the Committee’s report.

The Government representative expressed his gratitude for the constructive proposals and assessment of the situation in Uzbekistan during the discussion of the case. He regretted, however, that the conclusions did not reflect concrete proposals voiced by representatives of various member States. He further regretted that the discussion of this case revolved around the use of child labour in the cotton harvest, without reflecting the efforts of the Government to combat poverty, prostitution and drug abuse, and the absence in the country of forced child labour or cases of the use of children in armed conflicts. The conclusions should have reflected the multi-faceted nature of the issue. He confirmed the Government’s intention to further cooperate with the ILO.

Conclusions

The Committee took note of the oral information provided by the Government representative and the discussion that followed.

The Committee noted that the report of the Committee of Experts referred to allegations from the International Organisation of Employers (IOE), the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), and a significant number of other international workers’ organizations relating to the systematic and persistent use of forced child labour in the cotton fields of Uzbekistan for up to three months every year, as well as the substantial negative impact of this practice on the health and education of school-aged children obliged to participate in the cotton harvest. The Committee further noted the concerns expressed by the UN Human Rights Committee, the UN Committee for the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, as well as information in two UNICEF publications with regard to this practice.

The Committee noted the information provided by the Government outlining the laws and policies put in place to combat the forced labour of, and hazardous work by, children. The Committee also noted the Government’s statement that it had established a tripartite inter-ministerial working group with a view to developing specific programmes and actions aimed at fulfilling Uzbekistan’s obligations under ILO Conventions, as well as to update measures taken within the framework of the National Action Plan for the application of Conventions Nos 138 and 182 to ensure the protection of children’s rights. Furthermore, the Committee noted the detailed information provided by the Government on economic reforms undertaken in Uzbekistan, which had improved the level of employment, raised incomes for families and strengthened the banking and financial system. Moreover, the Committee noted the Government’s statement that concrete measures were being taken by the labour inspectorate officials to prosecute persons for violations of labour legislation, and that a number of administrative and disciplinary proceedings had been undertaken and fines imposed. The Committee further noted the Government’s statement denying the coercion of large numbers of children to participate in agricultural work, and that the use of compulsory labour was punishable with penal and administrative sanctions.

The Committee noted, once again, that, although legal provisions prohibited forced labour and the engagement of children in hazardous work, there was broad consensus among the United Nations bodies, the representative organizations of workers and employers and non-governmental organizations, regarding the continued practice of mobilizing school children for work during the cotton harvest. In this regard, this Committee was obliged to echo the deep concern expressed by these bodies, as well as several speakers in this Committee, about the systemic and persistent recourse to forced child labour in cotton production, involving an estimated 1 million children. The Committee emphasized the seriousness of such violations of the Convention. Moreover, the Committee noted with regret that, despite the Government’s indications that concrete measures had been undertaken by the labour inspectorate regarding violations of labour legislation, no information was provided on the number of persons prosecuted for the mobilization of children in the cotton harvest, despite previous requests by this Committee and the Committee of Experts for this information.

While noting the establishment of a tripartite inter-ministerial working group on 25 March 2011, the Committee observed that the Committee of Experts had already noted the establishment of an earlier interdepartmental working group on 7 June 2010, for on-the-ground monitoring to prevent the use of forced labour by school children during the cotton harvest. It noted with regret the absence of information from the Government on the concrete results of this monitoring, particularly information on the number of children, if any, detected by this interdepartmental working group (or any other national monitoring mechanism) engaged to work during the cotton harvest. In this regard, the Committee regretted to note that the significant progress that had been made regarding economic reform and growth had not been accompanied by corresponding progress with regard to combating the use of children for cotton harvesting.

The Committee expressed its serious concern at the insufficient political will and the lack of transparency of the Government to address the issue of forced child labour in cotton harvesting. It reminded the Government that the forced labour of, or hazardous work by, children, constituted the worst forms of child labour and urged the Government to take the necessary measures, as a matter of urgency, to ensure the effective implementation of national legislation prohibiting compulsory labour and hazardous work for children below the age of 18.

The Committee once again called on the Government to accept an ILO high-level tripartite observer mission that would have full freedom of movement and timely access to all situations and relevant parties, including in the cotton fields, in order to assess the implementation of the Convention. Observing that the Government had yet to respond positively to such a request, the Committee strongly urged the Government to receive such a mission in time to report back to the forthcoming session of the Committee of Experts. The Committee expressed the firm hope that, following this mission and the additional steps promised by the Government, it would be in a position to note tangible progress in the application of the Convention in the very near future.

The Committee also strongly encouraged the Government to avail itself of ILO technical assistance, and to commit to working with the ILO International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour.

Finally, the Committee invited the Government to provide comprehensive information in its next report to the Committee of Experts on the manner in which the Convention was applied in practice, including, in particular, enhanced statistical data on the number of children working in agriculture, their age, gender, and information on the number and nature of contraventions reported and penalties applied.

The Committee decided to include its conclusions in a special paragraph of its report.

The Government representative expressed his gratitude for the constructive proposals and assessment of the situation in Uzbekistan during the discussion of the case. He regretted, however, that the conclusions did not reflect concrete proposals voiced by representatives of various member States. He further regretted that the discussion of this case revolved around the use of child labour in the cotton harvest, without reflecting the efforts of the Government to combat poverty, prostitution and drug abuse, and the absence in the country of forced child labour or cases of the use of children in armed conflicts. The conclusions should have reflected the multi-faceted nature of the issue. He confirmed the Government’s intention to further cooperate with the ILO.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2010, Publication: 99th ILC session (2010)

A Government representative informed the Committee that his Government had submitted the report on the application of Convention No. 182 for the 2008–10 period. This report had been compiled with the participation and cooperation of government institutions, the Council of the Trade Unions Confederation of Uzbekistan and the Chamber of Commerce and Industry. He indicated that Uzbekistan implemented international standards on the prevention and prohibition of child labour and had reliable and effective mechanisms for the protection of the rights of children in the field of labour. More specifically, he indicated that forced labour was prohibited by the Constitution; the Act on Guarantees of the Rights of the Child defined children as persons under 18 years of age; the labour legislation set the minimum age for admission to employment at 16 years, strictly defined cases in which children of 15 years of age could work, and provided for the working conditions and preferential conditions of persons under 18 years of age; the Act on the Prevention of Trafficking in Persons provided for mechanisms to counter all forms of exploitation of persons, including forced child labour and the involvement of children in criminal activities; criminal legislation established higher penalties for involving children in illegal activities; and a list of occupations with unfavourable working conditions in which it was forbidden to employ persons under 18 years of age had been adopted.

The Government of Uzbekistan had adopted the National Action Plan (NAP) for the application of the ILO Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138), and Convention No. 182. Four priorities had been identified under this Plan. Firstly, with regard to the improvement of legislation, the Administrative Responsibility Code had been amended in 2009 so as to increase the liability of officials and individuals for violations of labour legislation and for coercing persons under 18 years of age to perform work. In addition to the “list of occupations with unfavourable working conditions in which it is forbidden to employ persons under 18 years of age”, the texts approved specific authorized limits for the lifting and carrying of loads by persons under 18 years of age and the Order on the Admission to Employment of Children under 16 years of age, regulating labour relations between an employer and an employee under 15 years of age and providing for compulsory general secondary education and special secondary professional education.

Secondly, a system of monitoring the application of Convention No. 182 had been prepared and the capacity of the responsible bodies strengthened. The following bodies were involved in the monitoring of the application of the Convention: both chambers of the Parliament; the Office of the General Prosecutor; the Ministry of Internal Affairs; the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection; the Ministry of Education; the Ministry of Secondary and Higher Education; the Council of the Trade Unions Confederation of Uzbekistan; the non-governmental youth organization “Kamolot”; the Council of Ministries of the Republic of Karakalpakstan; regional and local authorities; and civil society institutions. A joint resolution on activities to implement Conventions Nos 138 and 182 in educational institutions, providing for the monitoring of school attendance and the personal liability of heads of educational institutions, as well as monitoring compliance with the prohibition of the use of forced labour by students of secondary schools, professional colleges and academic lyceums had been adopted by the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Secondary and Higher Education and the youth organization “Kamolot”. The Council of the Trade Unions Confederation of Uzbekistan, the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection and the Chamber of Commerce and Industry had drawn up and approved the recommendation on the need to take into consideration the specific characteristics of the employment of persons under 18 years of age when concluding collective agreements.

Thirdly, all state bodies, civil society institutions, mass media and educational establishments had been involved in the dissemination of information on the rights of the child and the implementation of Convention No. 182. Recently, in collaboration with ILO–IPEC, a number of ILO documents, including Conventions and Recommendations, had been published in Uzbek. He added that, in May 2010, the delegation of Uzbekistan had taken part in the Global Conference on Child Labour organized by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment of the Netherlands and the ILO with the support of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), and the World Bank. Uzbekistan supported the Global Report “Accelerating action against child labour” prepared by the ILO, the World Bank and UNICEF, as well as the “Road Map”, a plan of action on the elimination of the worst forms of child labour by 2016. Together with UNICEF, the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection had been implementing the project to support the implementation of the National Action Plan on child labour, which provided for the creation of a joint working group, research on the social protection of vulnerable children, awareness raising on child labour issues, the preparation of information materials and educational handbooks, the holding of seminars and the provision of training, the development of minimum standards for children with special needs, etc. In the framework of the Annual Work Plan of the Programme “Protection of the Child”, a number of regional training activities had been carried out with the participation of khokims (governors), prosecutors, representatives of departments of internal affairs, commissions on minors and labour bodies.

The Government of Uzbekistan paid particular attention to families in need of assistance, mothers and children. Despite, the financial crisis, in 2010 total spending on social services amounted to 59 per cent of the state budget. In conclusion, he reaffirmed that Uzbekistan was ready to engage in dialogue and cooperation with all the parties concerned and the relevant international organizations in relation to the protection of the rights and interests of children.

The Employer members noted that this was a double-footnote case and that, although Convention No. 182 had entered into force only in June 2009, there was a long history in Uzbekistan of the issue of children working in the cotton harvest, to which the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) had been drawing attention for a number of years. They noted that, according to the 2010 Global Report on child labour, 115 million children were engaged in the worst forms of child labour, and of this total 67 million were found in the agricultural sector. The problem of child labour in agriculture was thus a prominent one, and it was therefore appropriate that the present case should come before the Committee.

Recalling that hazardous work comprised one of the worst forms of child labour under Article 3(d) of the Convention, and furthermore that Article 5 required the States parties to establish or designate appropriate mechanisms to monitor the implementation of the provisions giving effect to the Convention, they regretted the Government’s failure to provide indications on the extent to which child labour existed in the country. The Government had referred to plans, statutes and regulations respecting child labour, but had not provided any data in this respect; moreover, although the Government had referred to a national plan of action to eliminate the worst forms of child labour, in accordance with Article 6 of the Convention, it remained difficult to assess how it actually implemented the specific measures called for under Article 7.

They noted that, according to the Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF), tens of thousands of children were forced to work in the cotton harvest for periods of up to three months, or 25 per cent of the year. Research undertaken by another non-governmental organization (NGO), the International Labour Rights Forum, further substantiated the EJF’s claims. Indeed, the widely held estimate of the number of Uzbek children engaged in the cotton harvest ranged from 0.5 to 1.5 million, and the sheer size of the figures involved gave rise to serious concern; if so many children were prevented from attending school for up to a quarter of the calendar year, this would eventually bear grave consequences for Uzbek society as a whole. The Employer members noted that, although programmes to combat this problem existed, they appeared to have no teeth. Furthermore, it was not clear whether any of the various statues and regulations referred to in the Committee of Experts’ observation were in fact being implemented.

Noting that in its direct request the Committee of Experts had identified other deficiencies in the implementation of the Convention, with respect to the other worst forms of child labour, they emphasized that the problem at hand was greater than the issue of children engaged in cotton harvesting. They concluded that, although laws concerning the elimination of child labour appeared to be in place, there was no information respecting their effectiveness or implementation. They emphasized the necessity of programmes that, inter alia, measured the number of children being removed from work in the cotton harvest each year; this was a serious problem that needed to be remedied immediately.

The Worker members recalled that the present case concerned forced or compulsory work by children in cotton production and in work liable to harm their health, safety or morals. The systematic and persistent use of child labour in the production of cotton had been denounced by an important movement composed of the Trade Unions Confederation of Uzbekistan, as well as NGOs and certain media. In 2008, the Committee of Experts had noted, in the context of the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105), allegations by the Council of the Trade Unions Confederation of Uzbekistan reporting the mobilization and requisitioning of labour consisting, among others, of schoolchildren and students for the production of cotton, which could sometimes cover a period of three months. The number of schoolchildren compelled to participate in the cotton harvest had been estimated at between 0.5 and 1.5 million, which had jeopardized their education and health, especially in rural areas, as confirmed by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the Committee on the Rights of the Child.

According to the Government, employers could not use compulsory labour in agriculture and the public administration could not impose work on private employers. A Decree prohibiting child labour in cotton plantations had recently been adopted at the same time as the launching of a National Action Plan for the application of Conventions Nos 138 and 182. The Government had added that the Constitution and the national legislation explicitly prohibited all forms of forced labour and established guarantees for the protection of the rights and interests of children. It considered that the alleged facts were mistaken and were part of a denigration programme by NGOs intended to undermine the reputation of Uzbek cotton on the global market. Nevertheless, the introduction of legislative changes offered no guarantee at all that they would be given effect, supervised and enforced through penalties, nor that they would be the subject of consultation with the social partners, with the possible participation of duly recognized and identified NGOs.

Finally, the Worker members indicated that they were prepared to place their trust in the Government, on condition that it demonstrated without further ado its firm political will, particularly by designating an authority responsible for the implementation of Convention No. 182, accepting or proposing the provision of technical assistance and entering into partnership with IPEC.

The Government member of Spain, speaking on behalf of the Government members of Member States of the European Union of the Committee, expressed deep concern at the child labour situation in Uzbekistan. He noted with regret that, in its latest report, the Committee of Experts had expressed serious concern at the systematic and persistent use of forced labour, including forced child labour in the cotton fields in Uzbekistan. This concern, furthermore, was supported by well-documented evidence furnished by various organizations, including the Council of the Trade Unions Confederation of Uzbekistan, the IOE and the Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC).

The large-scale use of children had continued in the 2008 and 2009 cotton harvests, and estimates of the number of children engaged ranged from 0.5 to 1.5 million. Uzbekistan had not achieved any significant progress on this serious issue that had been under examination for a long time, and was thus clearly failing to comply with its obligations under Convention No. 182. He urged the adoption of rapid and effective action to resolve this problem as a matter of extreme urgency, and in this regard drew the Government’s attention to the “Road map to 2016”, the main outcome of the Hague Global Child Labour Conference of 2010. This document had been developed after several consultations, and had been adopted by acclamation on 11 May by over 450 delegates from 80 countries, representing governments, employers’ and workers’ organizations, international and regional organizations, and members of academia and civil society. He also noted that the “Road map to 2016” was aimed at substantially increasing efforts to eliminate the worst forms of child labour by 2016, and listed guiding principles and priority actions for governments, workers’ and employers’ organizations, NGOs and civil society, as well as regional and international organizations. The priority action points in the document provided practical guidance for the Government of Uzbekistan and all other relevant stakeholders, and could serve as a stepping stone to the elimination of the worst forms of child labour.

The Government member of the United States stated that her Government noted with concern that, notwithstanding the existence of constitutional and legislative prohibitions against forced labour and child labour in Uzbekistan, there had been persistent and credible reports that many thousands of rural school children were mobilized forcibly each autumn to harvest cotton under hazardous conditions. These reports called attention to the negative consequences for the education of rural children in Uzbekistan and for their health. Considering that forced labour and hazardous work were among the worst forms of child labour, it was understandable that the Committee of Experts had expressed serious concern at this situation so soon after the Government’s ratification of the Convention. While noting the commitment expressed by the Government of Uzbekistan to open and candid dialogue regarding its implementation of Convention No. 182, as well as the measures undertaken or envisaged by the Government to eliminate forced child labour, she stressed that much more could and must be done. Recalling that ILO technical assistance could be instrumental in helping the governments to find and implement solutions for the effective and sustained application of ratified Conventions, in both law and practice, she urged the Government of Uzbekistan to avail itself of that assistance. In particular, she joined the broad call for the Government to invite an ILO observer mission that would have full freedom of movement and timely access to all situations and relevant parties in order to assess the implementation of Convention No. 182, and all other relevant ratified Conventions, during the upcoming 2010 cotton harvest.

The Worker member of Norway indicated that reports of the 2009 cotton harvest from human rights defenders, independent journalists and photographers clearly demonstrated the still widespread use of forced child labour in Uzbekistan. According to those reports, cotton quotas for each region were prescribed directly from the central government in Tashkent to provincial governors, and then relayed down to district governors and education departments. Head teachers were also given quotas for their respective schools, and each child was ascribed a daily cotton quota.

According to the Ferghana.ru news agency, students at high schools and colleges in the Yangiyul district of the Tashkent region were forcibly sent to work in the cotton fields, as were children in the Syrdarya region. Furthermore, although officials claimed to have restricted labour in the fields to students aged 14 and older, reporters had found children between the ages of 12 and 13. She added that, according to the Central Asia News Agency, all students in the Andijan region had been recruited to participate in the cotton harvest from 17 September 2009 onwards, and that the Ezgulik human rights group had reported the mobilization of school children to pick cotton in the Surkhandarya region of southern Uzbekistan. Moreover, in the Ferghana region a 13-year old girl, interviewed by journalists in November 2009, had stated that she and her classmates had been picking cotton since 20 September and that, at the end of the harvest and in the cold weather, she was finding it difficult to meet her daily quota. Finally, a teacher interviewed in the Tashkent region last year had stated that during the harvest his school was obliged to pick 1.5 tonnes of cotton every day, and that the work was continuing throughout November, despite an administrator’s promise that it would end by October.

She maintained that forced labour and child labour occurred not only in Uzbekistan, but was present throughout the whole of the cotton industry worldwide. Cotton was processed in sweatshops in export processing zones around the world, and then sold to textile manufacturers, who were also notorious for their mistreatment of workers. It was time, she concluded, for child labour in Uzbekistan to end by implementing the measures set out in the Committee of Experts’ recommendations.

The Government member of the Russian Federation noted that the report on the application of Convention No. 182 submitted by the Government had been prepared in consultation with the social partners. With regard to the measures taken by the Government to implement the Convention, he indicated that Articles 37 and 45 of the Uzbek Constitution prohibited any compulsory labour and contained state guarantees of protection of the rights and interests of children; that a list of occupations with unfavourable working conditions in which it was forbidden to employ persons under 18 years of age had been adopted; that the Labour Code had been amended with regard to the minimum age for admission to employment and that the Nation Action Plan for the application of ILO Conventions Nos 138 and 182 had been adopted. The latter provided for the improvement of the legislation on supervising compliance with the prohibition of the use of child labour; the monitoring of the application of both Conventions; awareness raising; and the implementation of international projects on the elimination of the worst forms of child labour. The Government of Uzbekistan had been taking and would continue to take all the necessary measures in cooperation with the ILO to comply with its international obligations under the Convention.

The Government member of Kuwait stated that by custom and tradition many agricultural countries, especially developing ones, used a form of mutual help and family solidarity that could include the participation of children in some activities, namely in cotton or rice harvests. This form of mutual help could not be considered to be a form of forced labour or child labour in the strict legal sense for the following reasons. First, this form of work took place among family members. It was a mere expression of solidarity and a form of the transmission of knowledge among generations. Secondly, this form of work took place without a contract and without remuneration. It could not be considered a normal working relationship, even less a form of forced labour, because it was not imposed. Thirdly, this form of mutual help within the family did not involve the absence of the children from school, because it took place during school vacations and did not affect the schooling of children. It was important to recognize the efforts of the Government of Uzbekistan to adopt legislation and its request for technical assistance from the ILO.

The Government member of Belarus added that his Government supported the efforts of the Government of Uzbekistan to ensure compliance with Convention No. 182 in law and in practice. He considered that Uzbekistan, as a young and internationally active State, deserved encouragement and support and the ILO should not be taking decisions on the basis of media reports.

The Government member of Cuba noted that the Uzbek Constitution prohibited forced labour and child labour and that the legislation and National Action Plan, adopted in consultation with national organizations, demonstrated that the Government of Uzbekistan was taking positive steps for the implementation of the Convention. The ILO should encourage these steps.

The Government member of Switzerland concurred with the statement made by the Government member of Spain on behalf of the European Union.

The Government representative emphasized that his Government had complied with the principles of tripartism when preparing its report on the application of Convention No. 182. He added that young people under 18 years of age represented 40 per cent of the population of Uzbekistan. Children were not only his country’s future, but also its present. Ensuring protection against the worst forms of child labour was the priority for the Government. To that end, the necessary measures had been taken in law and in practice to monitor the application of the legislation prohibiting child labour. Particular attention was paid to the dissemination of information on the rights of the child. In his Government’s opinion, ensuring good education was the best way to eradicate child labour. Finally, he considered that the reports by NGOs on the alleged use of forced child labour were nothing more than a politically motivated campaign by developed nations competing on the cotton market. His Government wanted an honest partnership and would be grateful for any support and assistance by the ILO and international partners.

The Employer members regretted that, in its comments, the Government had failed to specify the workers engaged in the picking of cotton. Given that cotton exports totalled US$1 billion annually, and that half the country’s population comprised young persons, this was a serious question to which the Government needed to respond. Noting that there remained a substantial gap between law and practice with respect to forced and child labour, they emphasized once again the importance of statistical data on the number and ages of persons engaged in the cotton industry and suggested the establishment of independent monitoring programmes as a means of obtaining this information. They concluded that the Government needed to invest substantial resources to remove children from the cotton industry and ensure their attendance at school.

The Worker members observed that the Government’s argument rested on two main points. First, it considered that it had been the victim of a smear campaign by NGOs seeking to damage the reputation of its cotton products. Second, it had highlighted the adoption of new provisions intended to ensure the development of an effective education system and the creation of a legislative framework guaranteeing protection for children’s rights, through an Act amending the Code on Administrative Responsibility to increase the liability of those prosecuted for violating the legislation prohibiting child labour. However significant those steps might be, it was vital for the legislation on administrative liability to be applied and to be subject to consultation with the social partners, without excluding the participation of NGOs. The Government should consequently take steps to nominate a competent authority responsible for the implementation of the provisions of Convention No. 182; accept a technical assistance mission; develop a partnership with ILO–IPEC; and submit a progress report before the next session of the Committee of Experts in November 2010.

The Government representative indicated that 100 per cent of Uzbek cotton was produced by private farms. It was possible for children over 15 years of age to assist some 400,000 private farmers in the harvesting of cotton, as long as it was not detrimental to their health and education, and parental agreement had been obtained. Furthermore, national legislation prohibiting forced child labour was effectively implemented. Between 2008 and 2010, the Supreme Court had examined 128 criminal cases involving allegations of forced labour and forced child labour. Of 180 accused persons, 137 had been sentenced to imprisonment and others had been remanded. Finally, he indicated that compliance with Convention No. 182 would be discussed by the Parliament later this year and that relevant ministries and civil society institutions would be participating in these discussions.

Conclusions

The Committee took note of the oral information provided by the Government representative and the discussion that followed. The Committee noted that the report of the Committee of Experts referred to comments from the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) relating to the systematic and persistent use of forced child labour in the cotton fields of Uzbekistan for up to three months every year, as well as the substantial negative impact of this practice on the health and education of school aged children obliged to participate in the cotton harvest.

The Committee noted the detailed information provided by the Government outlining the laws, policies and action programmes put in place prohibiting the forced labour of, and hazardous work by, children in cotton production and harvesting. The Committee also noted the Government’s information on the measures taken within the framework of the National Action Plan for the application of Conventions Nos 138 and 182 to ensure the protection of children’s rights. The Committee further noted the Government’s statement denying the coercion of large numbers of children to participate in agricultural work, and that the use of compulsory labour was punishable with penal and administrative sanctions.

The Committee noted that, although various legal provisions prohibited forced labour and the engagement of children in hazardous work, it remained an issue of grave concern in practice. The Committee also noted the concern expressed by several speakers about the systematic and persistent recourse to forced child labour in cotton production. The Committee emphasized the seriousness of such violations of Convention No. 182. It reminded the Government that the forced labour of, or hazardous work by, children, constituted the worst forms of child labour and that member States were required to take immediate and effective measures to secure the prohibition and elimination of these worst forms of child labour as a matter of urgency. It accordingly urged the Government to take the necessary measures, as a matter of urgency, to ensure the effective implementation of national legislation prohibiting compulsory labour and hazardous work for children. In this regard, the Committee requested the Government to clearly identify the competent authority responsible for monitoring the legal provisions giving effect to Convention No. 182.

It also called on the Government to expand the capacity and reach of the labour inspectorate in enforcing the law to ensure that persons who infringed the Convention were prosecuted and that sufficiently effective and dissuasive sanctions were imposed.

Moreover, noting with serious concern the significant number of children removed from school and made to work in the cotton fields in hazardous conditions and underlining the importance of free, universal and compulsory education in preventing and combating the worst forms of child labour, the Committee called on the Government to take immediate and effective measures to ensure that school age children in rural and disadvantaged areas were not removed from school for the purpose of cotton production and harvesting. The Committee further requested the Government to supply detailed information in its report to the forthcoming meeting of the Committee of Experts on the effective and time-bound measures taken to remove children from forced labour and hazardous work and to provide for their rehabilitation and social integration, in conformity with Article 7(2) of the Convention.

The Committee urged the Government to accept an ILO high-level tripartite observer mission that would have full freedom of movement and timely access to all situations and relevant parties, including in the cotton fields, in order to assess the implementation of Convention No. 182. It expressed the preference that the mission would take place in time to report back to the forthcoming session of the Committee of Experts. It expressed the firm hope that, following this mission and the additional steps promised by the Government, it would be in a position to note tangible progress in the application of the Convention in the very near future.

Finally, concerning the issue of insufficient data on children working in the cotton sector, the Committee suggested that the Government carry out a national household survey on child labour or an area or sector specific survey.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Article 3 of the Convention. Worst forms of child labour. Clause (b). 
1. Use, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution. The Committee previously observed that section 10 of the Act on guarantees of the rights of the child (which provides for the protection of persons under 18 from all forms of exploitation, including inducement to criminal activity and prostitution) covers the prohibition of procuring or offering of a child for prostitution, but not the use of a child for that end. It also noted that section 135 prohibits trafficking in persons for the purpose of exploitation.

The Committee notes that the Government’s report once again refers to section 135 of the Criminal Code, though observes that the text of this provision appears to focus exclusively on the exploitation of a person within the context of trafficking. The Committee also notes that section 121 of the Criminal Code prohibits the “[c]oercion of a woman to a sexual intercourse … by a person, on which the woman was in financial, service, or other dependence”. In this regard, the Committee recalls that Article 3(b) of the Convention refers to all persons (boys and girls) under 18 years of age, and observes an absence of information on provisions which prohibit the use of both boys and girls for the purpose of prostitution (for example, by a client). The Committee consequently requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the use of both boys and girls under 18 for the purpose of prostitution is explicitly prohibited in national legislation.

2. Use, procuring or offering of a child for the production of pornography or for pornographic performances. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes that section 189 of the Code on Administrative Responsibility states it is an administrative offence to, inter alia, manufacture or distribute pictures, movies and video or sound recording with pornographic content, punishable to 40 to 100 times the minimum wage. The Committee also notes that, following the amendments to the Code on Administrative Responsibility of 16 April 2008 (No. ISG-153), section 188-1 states that it is prohibited to involve a minor in the commission of an administrative offence, and that this offence is punishable with a penalty of between 10 to 30 times the minimum wage.

Clause (c). Use, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities, in particular for the production and trafficking of drugs. The Committee previously noted that section 127 of the Criminal Code provides that involving a minor in begging, or the consumption of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances is a criminal offence. Furthermore, it noted that the involvement of a minor in a crime by person who has previously committed any crime relating to the illegal circulation of drugs shall receive a harsher penalty. The Committee observed that this provision did not appear to prohibit the use, procuring or offering of a child for the production and trafficking of drugs, as required by Article 3(c) of the Convention.

The Committee notes that section 188 of the Code of Administrative Responsibility prohibits involving a child in anti-social behaviour (such as begging, drinking alcohol, or consumption of psychotropic substances). It also notes that section 188-1 of the Code of Administrative Responsibility (as amended in 2008) prohibits involving a minor in committing an administrative offence. The Committee requests the Government to indicate if the production and trafficking of drugs is an administrative offence, whereby section 188-1 of the Code of Administrative Responsibility would prohibit the involvement of a child in this worst form of child labour. If not, the Committee requests the Government to take immediate measures to ensure that the use, procuring or offering of a child under 18 years of age for the production and trafficking of drugs is prohibited, in conformity with Article 3(c) of the Convention.

Clause (d) and Article 4(1). Hazardous work and determination of the list of types of hazardous work. The Committee previously noted that section 241 of the Labour Code prohibits the employment of persons under 18 years of age in work in unfavourable conditions, underground work and work which may harm their health, safety or morality as well as prohibiting these persons from lifting and handling weights exceeding the maximum permissible standards. The Committee noted that lists of these types of work had been established in 2001, and noted the Government’s indication that an inter-departmental working group was established to develop amendments to these lists.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement that the “List of occupations with unfavourable working conditions in which it is forbidden to employ persons under 18 years of age” was reviewed and approved by an order of the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection (MoLSP) and the Ministry of Health, and registered with the Ministry of Justice pursuant to Order No. 1990 on 29 July 2009. The Government also indicates that the “Specification of limitations for lifting and moving heavy objects by persons below 18 years” was also reviewed and approved by Order No. 1954 of 12 May 2009. The Committee requests the Government to provide copies of the revised “List of occupations with unfavourable working conditions in which it is forbidden to employ persons under 18 years of age” and the revised “Specification of limitations for lifting and moving heavy objects by persons below 18 years”, with its next report.

Article 5. Monitoring mechanisms. Labour inspectorate and occupational safety and health inspectorate. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication that units of the state inspectorate and the occupational safety and health inspectorate, operating within the MoLSP, have been established in each district of the country. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report dated 7 June 2010 that the MoLSP issued instructions on the local monitoring of compliance with labour legislation, with respect to ensuring children’s rights. The Government indicates that this monitoring resulted in the issuance of 284 injunctions and that administrative proceedings were taken against 234 persons. The Government further indicates that the Ministry of Internal Affairs, in conjunction with relevant departments and voluntary organizations, conducted 700 special raids, which resulted in administrative charges for 28 persons for violations of labour legislation. The Committee requests the Government to continue to supply information on the activities of the state inspectorate and the Ministry of Internal Affairs with regard to the monitoring of the worst forms of child labour, in particular hazardous work. In this regard, it once again requests the Government to supply, with its next report, extracts of the inspection reports of the state inspectorate and the occupational safety and health inspectorate specifying the extent and nature of violations detected involving children and young persons engaged in the worst forms of child labour.

Article 6. Programmes of action to eliminate the worst forms of child labour. National Action Plan to increase the effectiveness of the combating of trafficking in persons. The Committee previously noted the approval of a National Action Plan to increase the effectiveness of the combating of trafficking in persons 2008–10 (NAPT). The Committee also noted that the NAPT established a National Inter-agency Trafficking Commission (NIC), tasked with coordinating activities of agencies in the area of preventing trafficking in persons, as well as collecting and analysing information regarding trafficking in persons.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement in its report dated 7 June 2010 that the NIC is composed of heads of ministries and departments, and that similar commissions have been established at the regional and district levels. The Committee also notes the information in the report of the UN Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery, including its causes and consequences, submitted to the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) on 26 August 2010 that, in accordance with the NAPT, sociological and criminological surveys of problems connected with human trafficking are conducted in conjunction with the Ijtimoii Fikr centre and the Manaviyat Va Marifat social centre. The UN Special Rapporteur also indicates that special investigative units have been set up throughout the country for the thorough investigation of offences related to the trafficking in persons. However, the Committee notes that the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), in its concluding observations of 26 January 2010, expressed concern at the persistence of trafficking of women and girls in the country, including cross-border trafficking, and at the fact that the country has become both a country of origin and destination, as well as a transit point, for trafficking in persons (CEDAW/C/UZB/CO/4, paragraph 26). The Committee therefore requests the Government to redouble its efforts to eliminate the sale and trafficking of persons under 18 years of age, and to consider the possibility of extending the current NAPT beyond 2010. It requests the Government to continue to provide information on measures taken in this regard and on the activities of the NIC related to the trafficking of children.

Article 7(1). Sanctions. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication that the Criminal Code had been amended to increase the penalties for the offence of trafficking of a person under the age of 18 years. In this regard, the Committee notes that section 135(2)(a) of the Criminal Code, as amended in 2008, states that the offence of trafficking committed against a person known to the perpetrator to be under the age of 18 shall be punishable with imprisonment from eight to 12 years. The Committee also notes the information in the UN Special Rapporteur’s report of 25 August 2010 that the Ministry of Internal Affairs has formulated and issued guidelines on the investigation of offences linked to human trafficking. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the practical application of section 135(2)(a) of the Criminal Code, particularly the number of investigations, prosecutions, convictions and penalties imposed related to the trafficking of persons under the age of 18.

Article 7(2). Effective and time-bound measures. Clause (a). Preventing the engagement of children in the worst forms of child labour. 1. Sale and trafficking of children. The Committee previously noted that the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), in its concluding observations of 24 January 2006, expressed its concern that trafficking in persons is increasing in Uzbekistan (E/C.12/UZB/CO/1, paragraph 25). The Committee also noted the Government’s acknowledgement (in its report submitted to the HRC of 5 September 2008 for the Universal Periodic Review), that human trafficking was indeed an acute problem (A/HRC/WG.6/3/UZB/1, paragraph 28). The Committee further noted that the Act on the prevention of trafficking in persons provides for the implementation of several measures to prevent trafficking in persons, and requested the Government to provide information on the impact of the measures taken pursuant to this Act.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement in its report dated 3 February 2010 on the implementation of the National Plan of Action for the application of ILO Conventions Nos 138 and 182 (NPA on C. 138 and C. 182) that preventive work was carried out by the Ministry of Internal Affairs, in conjunction with other services, with regard to the fraudulent removal of children to work abroad. The Committee also notes the information in the UN Special Rapporteur’s report of 26 August 2010 that the MoLSP has taken measures to stop clandestine labour migration. The UN Special Rapporteur further indicates that the MoLSP conducts information campaigns through television advertisements, banners, posters, theatre plays, publications, seminars and conferences on the subject (A/HRC/15/20/Add.1, paragraph 76). However, the Committee notes that the CEDAW, in its concluding observations of 26 January 2010, expressed concern at the failure of the Government to address the root causes of trafficking, stating that this impedes efforts to address the problem of trafficking in a serious way. The CEDAW requested the Government to take proactive and sustained measures to, inter alia, ensure the prevention of trafficking (CEDAW/C/UZB/CO/4, paragraphs 26 and 27). The Committee therefore requests the Government to redouble its efforts, within the framework of the NAPT and the NPA on C. 138 and C. 182, to prevent the trafficking of persons under 18 years of age. It also requests the Government to provide information on concrete measures taken in this regard, and on the results achieved.

2. Access to free basic education. The Committee previously noted that the legislative framework in Uzbekistan (the Constitution and the Act on guarantees of the rights of the child) provides a right to education, and for guaranteed free and compulsory general secondary education as well as secondary special vocational education. The Committee also noted that, in accordance with the Education Act and the Act on the national programme for the training of officials, the education system was reformed to provide for 12 years of free compulsory education. The Committee further noted the UNICEF information that access to primary and secondary education in Uzbekistan was above average for the region and that considerable efforts had been made to improve the quality of education, although a gap in access to primary school existed between the richest and poorest quintiles of the population.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement in its report dated 3 February 2010 that it has invested 12 per cent of its GDP annually into education over the last few years. The Government also indicates, in its report of 7 June 2010, that the education of orphans and children left without parents is based on full state support, in a manner determined by law. The Committee also notes the information in the Government’s report on the implementation of the NPA on C. 138 and C. 182 that the Government is taking measures to ensure the attendance of students in schools, pursuant to a joint resolution of the Ministry of Public Education, the Ministry of Higher and Secondary Special Education of November 2009 (No.-1-04/340, No. 43 and No. 322). Furthermore, the Government indicates that the Centre for Secondary Special Vocational Education approved instructions for monitoring the attendance of students studying in vocational education establishments (through Order No. 44 of 25 February 2009). This strengthened monitoring revealed that 7,016 such students were not attending school. Measures were taken to return 6,410 of these students to a vocational school while disciplinary proceedings were taken against 78 heads of vocational schools.

The Committee notes the information from the UNESCO Institute of Statistics that the net enrolment rate of children in primary education in Uzbekistan is 87 per cent for girls and 89 per cent for boys. The Committee also notes the information regarding Uzbekistan’s progress on the Millennium Development Goals from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in Uzbekistan (https://undp.uz) indicating that the high enrolment rates do not always translate into continuous school attendance, as the proportion of children between the ages of 7 and 11 years who actually attend school is approximately 74 per cent for boys and 73 per cent for girls. The Committee further notes the information in a document entitled “UNICEF in Uzbekistan” (available on the UNICEF website (www.unicef.org)) that, while primary education is officially free, the rising costs of textbooks, meals, clothing and transport are leading to falling attendance rates. Moreover, a 2005 ILO–IPEC study entitled “Rapid Assessment of informal employment of children in urban and rural areas in Uzbekistan” (ILO–IPEC Rapid Assessment) indicates that a lack of money for textbooks and school clothes was an underlying factor for school drop-outs. Lastly, the Committee notes that the CEDAW, in its concluding observations of 26 January 2010, expressed concern at the hidden unofficial costs of education and recommended that the Government ensure that primary education is free and accessible to all children and to take measures to eliminate all hidden costs of school attendance (CEDAW/C/UZB/CO/4, paragraph 30 and 31). Considering that access to free basic education contributes to preventing the engagement of children in the worst forms of child labour, the Committee encourages the Government to pursue its efforts to improve the functioning of the education system, and to take measures to address the costs of compulsory education, paying particular attention to children from the poorest segments of the population. It also urges the Government to redouble its efforts to ensure that enrolled students attend school, and to provide information on the results achieved with regard to increasing school attendance rates and decreasing drop-out rates.

Clause (b). Assistance for the removal of children from the worst forms of child labour. National Rehabilitation Centre to provide assistance and protection for the victims of trafficking in persons (National Rehabilitation Centre). The Committee previously noted that the Act on the prevention of trafficking in persons provides for the establishment of specialized institutions to ensure the protection of victims of trafficking and to provide them with assistance. In this regard, the Government adopted a resolution on the formation of the National Rehabilitation Centre in November 2008. The Committee notes the statement in the UN Special Rapporteur’s report of 26 August 2010 that the construction of the National Rehabilitation Centre is almost complete and that the centre has been equipped with the necessary tools to provide victims with effective medical, psychological, legal and social support (A/HRC/15/20/Add.1, paragraph 74). However, the Committee also notes the statement in a UNICEF publication entitled “Risks and Realities of Child Trafficking and Exploitation in Central Asia” of 31 March 2010 (UNICEF Trafficking Report) that NGOs used to provide temporary shelters to victims of trafficking, but that these have been closed due to a lack of funding (page 83). The Committee further notes that the CEDAW, in its concluding observations of 26 January 2010, expressed concern regarding the inadequate rehabilitation procedures available to victims of trafficking who have returned from abroad (CEDAW/C/UZB/CO/4, paragraph 26). The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that child victims of trafficking receive appropriate rehabilitative and social reintegration services. It requests the Government to provide information on the impact of the measures taken in this regard, including the number of children reached by the National Rehabilitation Centre, once this centre is operational.

Clause (d). Children at special risk. Street children. The Committee previously noted that the Committee on the Rights of the Child, in its concluding observations of 2 June 2006 (CRC/C/UZB/CO/2, paragraph 62), shared the Government’s concern at the increasing number of street children. In this regard, the Committee notes the information available on the UNICEF website in a document entitled “UNICEF in Uzbekistan” that the official number of street children doubled between 2001 and 2004, to reach a total of 5,400 children. The Committee also notes the statement in the UNICEF Trafficking Report that children who work on the streets are highly visible (page 49). The Committee further notes the information in the ILO–IPEC Rapid Assessment that the majority of street children only attended primary school, dropping out by the age of 10 or 12. The ILO–IPEC Rapid Assessment also indicates that begging, theft and prostitution are among the most common sources of earnings for these street children (pages 55–56). Considering that street children are particularly vulnerable to the worst forms of child labour, the Committee once again requests the Government to take effective and time-bound measures to ensure that such persons under 18 living and working on the streets are protected from these worst forms. It requests the Government to provide information on the impact of the measures taken in this regard.

Article 8. International cooperation and assistance. 1. International cooperation. The Committee previously noted the Government’s accession to the United Nations Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children (the Palermo Protocol) and requested information on the international cooperation measures undertaken by the Government to combat the trafficking of children. The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report of 7 June 2010 that international cooperation is carried out through the Agreement on Cooperation of the Commonwealth of Independent States for combating human trafficking, human organs and human tissues. The Government also indicates that it has bilateral agreements to combat crime with both Lithuania and the Islamic Republic of Iran. The Committee further notes the information from the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) of July 2009 that it is implementing a project entitled “Strengthening the criminal justice response to trafficking in persons in Uzbekistan” to assist the Government in its implementation of the Palermo Protocol. Through this project, the UNODC indicates that it is supporting the Government’s efforts to: strengthen human trafficking legislation; increase the capacity of law enforcement and prosecution officials through training; establish a human trafficking database and facilitate regional and international cooperation. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the impact of the measures taken within the framework of this UNODC project, particularly with regard to combating the trafficking of children.

2. Poverty reduction. The Committee previously noted that the NPA on C. 138 and C. 182 included the identification and social protection of children in risk groups, and measures to monitor (on a quarterly basis) the situation of children in poor families. In this regard, in 2008, the Makhalla Fund surveyed over 1 million families in order to identify disadvantaged families. Noting that poverty reduction programmes contribute to breaking the poverty cycle, which is essential for the elimination of the worst forms of child labour, the Committee requested information on the measures taken in this regard.

The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report on the implementation of the NPA on C. 138 and C. 182 that the Makhalla Fund has provided material assistance to more than 250,000 of the disadvantaged families that were identified. The Government also indicates that the MoLSP has helped 1,658 unemployed members of disadvantaged families find employment. The Government further states that, in local branches of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, databases were established on children in disadvantaged families, and 4,796 children so identified received social and legal assistance from Ministry of Internal Affairs centres. The Committee also notes the Government’s statement that the economic reforms carried out in Uzbekistan have achieved stable economic growth and resulted in higher rates of employment and higher family incomes, which constitute important preconditions for reducing the level of child labour in the country. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on measures taken, within the framework of the NPA on C. 138 and C. 182, to protect children of poor families from the worst forms of child labour, and on the results achieved.

Part V of the report form. Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee previously noted that, in its concluding observations of 24 January 2006 (E/C.12/UZB/CO/1, paragraph 25), the CESCR expressed its concern about the lack of reliable information, including statistics, on the extent of the problem of trafficking in persons in Uzbekistan. It also noted that the NPA on C. 138 and C. 182 included plans to ensure the collection of data about the number of working persons under 18 years of age though regular inspections. The Committee also noted that the MoLSP carried out analyses and determines the number of persons aged under 18 years that are employed in the informal sector, conducted in accordance with Resolution No. 106 of 24 May 2007 of the Cabinet of Ministers.

The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report on the implementation of the NPA on C. 138 and C. 182 that the MoLSP intends to carry out an analysis and estimate of the number of persons under 18 years who are employed. The Government indicates that the methodology for the conduct of this survey has been approved through MoLSP Order No. 1033 of 29 June 2009, which also included measures to conduct a survey on child labour in the informal sector. The Committee requests the Government to provide statistical information from the MoLSP’s survey on the number of working children under the age of 18, especially concerning those children engaged in the worst forms, as soon as this survey is completed. It also requests the Government to provide information from the study on child labour in the informal sector. The Committee further requests the Government to provide any other information about the application of the Convention in practice, including statistics on the nature, extent and trends of the worst forms of child labour, in particular child trafficking for labour or sexual exploitation. To the extent possible, all information provided should be disaggregated by sex and age.

[The Government is asked to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 100th session and to reply in detail to the present comments in 2011.]

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

The Committee notes the Government’s communication of 25 January 2010 in reply to the 2009 communication of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE), and the Government’s reports dated 3 February 2010 and 7 June 2010. The Committee also notes the communication of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) dated 25 August 2010. The Committee further notes the joint communication dated 22 November 2010 from the ITUC, the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), the European Trade Union Federation: Textiles, Clothing and Leather (ETUF:TCL), the International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers’ Association (IUF) and the European Federation of Food, Agriculture and Tourism Trade Unions (EFFAT), as well as the joint communication dated 22 November 2010 from the European Apparel and Textile Confederation (EURATEX) and the ETUF:TCL. The Committee finally takes note of the detailed discussions that took place at the 99th Session of the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in June 2010 concerning the application by Uzbekistan of Convention No. 182.

Article 3, clauses (a) and (d), and Article 7(1) of the Convention. Worst forms of child labour and penalties. Forced or compulsory labour in cotton production and hazardous work. The Committee previously noted the various legal provisions in Uzbekistan which prohibit forced labour, including article 37 of the Constitution, section 7 of the Labour Code, and section 138 of the Criminal Code. It also noted that section 241 of the Labour Code prohibits the employment of persons under 18 years of age in work in unfavourable conditions or which may harm their health, safety or morals. The Committee further noted that the “List of occupations with unfavourable working conditions in which it is forbidden to employ persons under 18 years of age” prohibited children from watering and gathering cotton by hand and noted the IOE’s indication that the Uzbek Prime Minister signed a decree banning child labour in cotton plantations in Uzbekistan in September 2008. However, the Committee also noted the IOE’s assertion that, despite the legislative framework against forced labour, schoolchildren (estimates ranging from half a million to 1.5 million schoolchildren) are forced by the Government to work in the national cotton harvest for up to three months each year. Moreover, the Committee noted that the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights expressed its concern at the situation of school-age children obliged to participate in the cotton harvest instead of attending school during this period (24 January 2006, E/C.12/UZB/CO/1, paragraph 20), and that the Committee on the Rights of the Child expressed concern at the serious health problems (such as intestinal and respiratory infections, meningitis and hepatitis) experienced by many schoolchildren as a result of this participation (2 June 2006, CRC/C/UZB/CO/2, paragraphs 64–65).

The Committee notes the statement in the ITUC’s allegations that state-sponsored forced child labour continues to underpin Uzbekistan’s cotton industry. The ITUC contends that a vast disparity exists between legal commitments made to eradicate forced child labour and the practical implementation, as seen in the forcible involvement of hundreds of thousands of schoolchildren in the autumn 2009 harvest. In this regard, the ITUC asserts that, despite the Government’s denial, sources in the country confirm the widespread mobilization of forced labour (particularly of children) in the 2009 cotton harvest in at least 12 of Uzbekistan’s 13 regions: Andijan, Bukhara, Jizzakh, Ferghana, Karakalpakstan, Kaskadrya, Khoresm, Navoi, Samarkland, Syrdarya, Surkhandarya and Tashkent. The ITUC communication emphasizes that this involvement is not the result of family poverty, but state-sponsored mobilization which benefits the Government. The ITUC further states that production quotas (originating from the central Government and distributed through district education departments) are supplied to head teachers who then mobilize students, and that this forced labour involves children as young as 9 years old (though the majority of schoolchildren involved are 11 years or older). The ITUC alleges that these children are required to work every day, even on weekends, and that the work involved is hazardous, involving carrying heavy loads, the application of pesticides and harsh weather conditions, with accidents reportedly resulting in injuries and deaths. These children are provided with insufficient drinking water, and often resort to drinking water contaminated with pesticides out of the irrigation system. Moreover, the ITUC underlines that, although forced labour was again part of the harvest in 2010, there was an increase in surveillance operatives in cotton fields to prevent documentation of the issue, and that accurate figures on the issue are impossible to obtain. The ITUC recommends that the Government take urgent action, including measures to publicly renounce the use of forced child labour in the cotton industry, to commit all necessary resources to address this phenomenon, to improve ethical and technical standards in the cotton industry and to strengthen social dialogue in the country.

The Committee notes the Government’s reply to the IOE’s communication which states that the allegations concerning widespread forced labour in agriculture are an unfounded attempt by foreign actors to undermine the reputation of Uzbek cotton in the global market. The Government states that almost all of the cotton produced in the country is produced on private cotton farms, and that the well-developed education system is an obstacle to the employment of children in forced labour. The Government further indicates that it is traditional for older children to assist in family businesses, and that this practice is not prohibited. With regard to penalties, the Government states that on 21 December 2009 the Act on additions and amendments to the Uzbekistan Code of Administrative Liability was adopted which increased the penalty for violations of labour legislation and compulsory labour of persons under 18 years of age.

The Committee notes the statement in the UNICEF publication entitled “Risks and Realities of Child Trafficking and Exploitation in Central Asia” of 31 March 2010 that the issue of seasonal mobilization of children for the cotton harvest in Uzbekistan is a growing concern internationally and at home (page 49). The Committee also notes that the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, in its concluding observations of 26 January 2010, expressed its concern regarding the educational consequences of girls and boys working during the cotton harvest season, and requested the Government to guarantee that the cotton harvest season does not compromise the right of these children to education (CEDAW/C/UZB/CO/4, paragraphs 30–31). Moreover, the Committee notes that the UN Human Rights Committee, in its concluding observations of 7 April 2010, stated that it remained concerned about reports that children are still employed and subjected to harsh working conditions, in particular for cotton harvesting. The UN Human Rights Committee emphasized that the Government should ensure that its national legislation and international obligations regulating child labour are fully respected in practice (CCPR/C/UZB/CO/3, paragraph 23).

Furthermore, the Committee notes that the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards concluded that, although various legal provisions prohibit forced labour and the engagement of children in hazardous work, this remains an issue of grave concern in practice. It accordingly urged the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure the effective implementation of national legislation prohibiting compulsory labour and hazardous work for children.

The Committee notes the convergence of allegations and the broad consensus among the United Nations bodies, the representative organizations of employers and workers and NGOs, regarding the continued practice of mobilizing schoolchildren for work in the cotton harvest. The Committee must therefore echo the serious concern expressed by these bodies at the continued practice whereby a significant number of children under 18 are taken from school each year and made to work in the cottons fields under hazardous conditions. In this regard, the Committee recalls that, by virtue of Article 3(a) and (d) of the Convention, forced labour and hazardous work are considered as worst forms of child labour and that, by virtue of Article 1 of the Convention, member States are required to take immediate and effective measures to secure the elimination of the worst forms of child labour, as a matter of urgency. Furthermore, the Committee recalls that, by virtue of Article 7(1), of the Convention, ratifying countries are required to ensure the effective implementation and enforcement of the provisions giving effect to the Convention, including through the provision and application of penal sanctions. The Committee joins the Committee on the Application of Standards in urging the Government to take immediate and effective time-bound measures to eradicate the forced labour of, or hazardous work by, children under 18 years in cotton production, as a matter of urgency. In this regard, it requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that thorough investigations and robust prosecutions of offenders are carried out and that sufficiently effective and dissuasive sanctions are imposed in practice.

Articles 5 and 6. Monitoring mechanisms and programmes of action to eliminate the worst forms of child labour. National Plan of Action for the application of ILO Conventions Nos 138 and 182 (NPA on Convention No. 138 and Convention No. 182). The Committee previously noted that the NPA on Convention No. 138 and Convention No. 182 (approved in 2008) included measures to address the forced labour of children, in particular in the agricultural sector, including: monitoring of the prohibition of the use of school pupils in forced labour; public control of the prohibition of the use of forced child labour in territories of self-governing bodies of citizens; the establishment of a working group to locally monitor the prohibition of the use of forced labour in cotton picking of school pupils; and initiatives to inform farmers on matters related to the prohibition of violating legislation on the engagement of children in agricultural work. However, the Committee also noted the IOE’s allegation that it remained uncertain as to whether the implementation of these adopted measures would be sufficient to address the deeply rooted practice of forced child labour in the cotton fields.

The Committee notes the ITUC’s statement that the NPA on Convention No. 138 and Convention No. 182 requires improvement. For the NPA on Convention No. 138 and Convention No. 182 to be credible and effective, forced child labour needs to be eradicated, and the monitoring of this phenomenon must be completely independent. The ITUC recommends that a comprehensive national action plan which recognizes and addresses the root causes of this practice must be put in place.

The Committee notes the detailed report submitted by the Government dated 3 February 2010 on the implementation of the NPA on Convention No. 138 and Convention No. 182. The Government indicates in this report that on 3 November 2009, the Ministry of Public Education and the Ministry of Higher and Secondary Special Education adopted and implemented a joint resolution on “Measures to apply the Minimum Age Convention and the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention in the education system” (No.1-04/340, No. 43 and No. 322). Pursuant to this resolution, heads of educational institutions have personal responsibility for the protection of students and their attendance at school and that monitoring will be carried out concerning the prohibited use of compulsory labour of students in schools. The Committee also notes that, by February 2010, information seminars were held in 11 provinces to explain the prohibition on employing children in agricultural work to farmers. The Committee further notes the information in the Government’s report of 7 June 2010, that an interdepartmental working group was established, and a programme approved, for on-the-ground monitoring to prevent the use of forced labour by schoolchildren during the cotton harvest. The Government indicates that the supervision of labour legislation and regulations (including the prohibition on employing children in adverse working conditions) is carried out by the specifically authorized stated legal and technical inspections of the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection and trade union workers, pursuant to section 9 of the Labour Code and Government Resolution No. 29 of 19 February 2010. In addition, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in this report that it is collaborating with UNICEF, which is carrying out a subproject entitled “Support for the implementation of the NPA on child labour” within the framework of the UNICEF Child Protection Programme for the country. In this regard, the Committee notes that the 2009 UNICEF factsheet entitled “Uzbekistan Fast Facts” (available on the UNICEF website: www.unicef.org) states that ensuring all children stay in school throughout the entire academic year and are not forced to harvest cotton is a priority for the Child Protection Programme. Another document on the UNICEF website entitled “The situation of women and children in Uzbekistan” states that the issue of child labour in the cotton sector remains to be fully addressed.

While noting the Government’s information on the numerous measures taken to monitor the involvement of schoolchildren in the cotton harvest, including measures taken within the framework of the NPA on Convention No. 138 and Convention No. 182, the Committee notes an absence of information from the Government on the concrete results of this monitoring, particularly information on the number of children, if any, detected by the labour inspectorate (or any other national monitoring mechanism) engaged to work in the cotton harvest. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to provide information on the concrete impact of the various measures taken to monitor the prohibition of the use of forced child labour in the agricultural sector. Furthermore, the Committee urges the Government to strengthen the capacity and expand the reach of the labour inspectorate in enforcing the laws giving effect to the Convention to ensure that school-age children in rural and disadvantaged areas are not removed from school for the purpose of cotton production and harvesting. It requests the Government to provide detailed information on the results achieved in this regard, particularly the number and nature of violations detected with regard to children under 18 working in the cotton harvest, and the penalties imposed.

Part V of the report form. Application of the Convention in practice. Forced or compulsory labour in cotton production and hazardous work. The Committee notes that, while the Government provides information on the application of labour legislation and the employment of children in general, the Government does not provide any information on the engagement of children in the autumn 2010 cotton harvest, including their use in situations of forced labour or hazardous work. Nonetheless, it appears to the Committee that this practice remains prevalent in the country, especially in view of the ongoing project carried out with the assistance of UNICEF to address the situation of child labour in the cotton sector. In light of the Government’s assertion that children are not involved in the cotton harvest, the Committee considers it essential that independent monitors be granted unrestricted access to document the situation during the cotton harvest. In this regard, the Committee observes that the ITUC, ETUC, IUF, EFFAT, ETUF:TCL and EURATEX believe that a mission must be carried out as soon as possible in order to address the practice of child labour in the cotton sector and to initiate steps towards its eradication. The Committee further observes that the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards urged the Government to accept a high-level ILO tripartite observer mission that would have full freedom of movement and timely access to all situations and relevant parties, including in the cotton fields, in order to assess the implementation of Convention No. 182. Noting that the Government has yet to respond positively to this recommendation, the Committee strongly encourages the Government to accept a high-level ILO tripartite observer mission, and expresses the firm hope that such an ILO mission can take place in the very near future.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

[The Government is asked to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 100th Session and to reply in detail to the present comments in 2011.]

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

The Committee notes the Government’s first report.

Article 3 of the Convention. Worst forms of child labour. Clause (a). Slavery and practices similar to slavery. 1. Sale and trafficking of children. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that the Act on the Prevention of Trafficking in Persons, adopted on 17 April 2008, establishes criminal responsibility for trafficking in persons. The Committee notes that, according to section 3 of the Act, trafficking in persons consists of recruiting, transporting, transferring, concealing or receiving persons for the purpose of exploitation, which includes the exploitation or the prostitution of other persons or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or service, slavery or customs equivalent to slavery. Moreover, the Committee notes that section 135 of the Criminal Code provides that the trafficking of people outside of Uzbekistan for the purpose of engaging them in sexual or any other exploitation is a criminal offence.

Clause (b). 1. Use, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 10 of the Act on Guarantees of the Rights of the Child, which defines children as persons under 18 years of age, provides for the protection of children from all forms of exploitation, including inducement to criminal activity and prostitution. The Committee considers that section 10 of the Act on Guarantees of the Rights of the Child covers the prohibition of procuring or offering of a child for prostitution, but not the use of a child for that end. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that section 135 of the Criminal Code was amended to provide that the use, recruiting, transportation, transfer, concealment or harbouring of persons for the purpose of exploitation is punishable by a custodial sentence. The Committee reminds the Government that Article 3(b) of the Convention calls for the prohibition of the use, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether section 135 of the Criminal Code prohibits and sanctions the use of a child under 18 years of age for prostitution, i.e. by a client.

2. Use, procuring or offering of a child for the production of pornography or for pornographic performances. The Committee notes that, according to section 130 of the Criminal Code, the production for the purposes of demonstration or dissemination, as well as demonstration or dissemination, of pornographic objects among persons under 21 years of age, is prohibited. The Committee observes, however, that there appear to be no provisions prohibiting the use, procuring or offering of a child under 18 years for the production of pornography or for pornographic performances, as required by Article 3(b) of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to take immediate measures to ensure that the use, procuring or offering of a child under 18 years of age for the production of pornography or for pornographic performances is prohibited and to provide information on the progress made in this regard in its next report.

Clause (c). Use, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities, in particular for the production and trafficking of drugs. The Committee notes that section 127 of the Criminal Code provides that involving a minor in consumption of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances is a criminal offence. Furthermore, the involvement of a minor into such a crime by a person who has previously committed any crime relating to the illegal circulation of drugs or done on the premises of educational institutions or in other places that school children and students use for the purposes of educational, sports or cultural activities, are aggravating circumstances. However, the Committee observes that there appear to be no provisions prohibiting the use, procuring or offering of a child for the production and trafficking of drugs, as required by Article 3(c) of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to take immediate measures to ensure that the use, procuring or offering of a child under 18 years of age for illicit activities, in particular the production and trafficking of drugs, is prohibited. It requests the Government to provide information on the progress made in this regard with its next report.

Clause (d) and Article 4, paragraph 1. Hazardous work and determination of the list of types of hazardous work. The Committee notes that section 241 of the Labour Code prohibits the employment of persons under 18 years of age in work in unfavourable conditions, underground work and work which may harm their health, safety or morality. Section 241 also prohibits persons under 18 from lifting and handling weights exceeding the maximum permissible standards. According to the same provision, the list of works which is considered unfavourable and the maximum permissible standards for weights to be lifted by persons under 18 are determined by the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection (MoLSP) and the Ministry of Health, in consultation with the social partners. In this regard, the Committee takes note of the “List of occupations with unfavourable working conditions in which it is forbidden to employ persons under 18 years of age”, approved by Joint Decree of the MoLSP and the Ministry of Health (No. 1) of Uzbekistan on 30 May 2001. The Committee notes the Government’s information that this list, as well as the “Specific permitted limits on lifting and carrying of loads by persons aged under 18 years”, are revised as necessary (at least every five years), after consultation with the employers and workers concerned. The Government indicates that an interdepartmental working group was set up in 2009 with the participation of the social partners to develop proposals to improve labour legislation and the adoption of additions and amendments to both the list on occupations with unfavourable working conditions and the specific permitted limits on lifting and carrying loads. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress made in the adoption of the amendments to the “List of occupations with unfavourable working conditions in which it is forbidden to employ persons under 18 years of age” and to the “Specific permitted limits on lifting and carrying of loads by persons aged under 18 years”. It requests the Government to supply a copy of both documents as soon as these amendments have been adopted.

Article 5. Monitoring mechanisms. 1. National Interdepartmental Commission on Trafficking in Persons (NIC on Trafficking in Persons). The Committee notes the Government’s information that the NIC on Trafficking in Persons was established through the adoption of the Act on the Prevention of Trafficking in Persons. According to the Act, the fundamental tasks of the NIC include coordinating activities of state agencies, autonomous civil agencies and non-governmental organizations in the area of preventing trafficking in persons, organizing events directed at increasing the effectiveness of the work in exposing and eliminating the causes and conditions contributing to trafficking in persons, and collecting and analysing information regarding the scope, status and tendencies of trafficking in persons. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the activities of the NIC on Trafficking in Persons, in particular with regard to combating the sale and trafficking of children under 18 years for labour or commercial sexual exploitation, and the results achieved.

2. Labour inspectorate and occupational safety and health inspectorate. The Committee notes the Government’s information that the state inspectorate and the occupational safety and health inspectorate operate within the system of the MoLSP and are established in each district of the country, exercising state control over violations of the rights of young people at work. The MoLSP also carries out analyses and determines the number of persons aged under 18 years that are employed in the informal sector through quarterly employment surveys, conducted in accordance with Resolution No. 106 of 24 May 2007 of the Cabinet of Ministers. The Committee requests the Government to supply, with its next report, extracts of the inspection reports of the state inspectorate and the occupational safety and health inspectorate specifying the extent and nature of violations detected involving children and young persons engaged in the worst forms of child labour, in particular hazardous work. It also requests the Government to supply copies of the latest quarterly employment surveys conducted by the MoLSP on the employment of children under 18 years in the worst forms of child labour in the informal sector.

Article 6. Action programmes. 1. National Action Plan to increase the effectiveness of the combating of trafficking in persons. The Committee notes the Government’s information that a National Action Plan (Action Plan) to increase the effectiveness of the combating of trafficking in persons 2008–10, which establishes a National Inter-agency Trafficking Commission, was approved by Presidential Decree concerning “Measures to increase the effectiveness of the combating on trafficking in persons 2008–2010”. The Action Plan includes measures to increase the effectiveness of action against trafficking in persons, providing for surveys, criminal investigations, and specific measures to protect witnesses and victims of trafficking. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the implementation of the Action Plan to increase the effectiveness of the combating of trafficking in persons and on the measures undertaken in the framework of that Action Plan with regard to the elimination of the sale and trafficking of children under 18 years of age. It also requests the Government to supply a copy of this Action Plan.

2. National Plan of Action (NPA) for the application of ILO Conventions Nos 138 and 182. The Committee notes the Government’s information that, on 12 September 2008, it approved the NPA for the application of ILO Conventions Nos 138 and 182 with a view to coordinate the activities of ministries, departments and local government authorities and to strengthen cooperation with international and voluntary organizations on child labour. The Committee also notes the Government’s information that the NPA was prepared with the agreement of the 20 ministries and departments concerned, including the MoLSP, the Council of the Uzbekistan Trade Union Federation (workers) and the Chamber of Trade and Industry of the Republic of Uzbekistan (employers). The Committee notes that, as indicated by the Government, the NPA is made up of 37 paragraphs, detailing the activities to be implemented with a view to achieving the following objectives:

(a)   improving the legislative and regulatory framework, in particular the enforcement of the prevention of illegal use of child labour;

(b)   monitoring and control of the application of the Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138) and the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182);

(c)   conducting intensive information and explanatory campaigns on questions of the application of these two Conventions;

(d)   implementing projects of international cooperation aimed at the elimination of the worst forms of child labour.

The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the implementation of the activities undertaken within the framework of the NPA for the application of ILO Conventions Nos 138 and 182 with regard to the elimination of the worst forms of child labour, and the results achieved.

3. National Plan of Action on the Well-Being of Children. The Committee notes that, according to the national report submitted in accordance with paragraph 15(a) of the Annex to Human Rights Council Resolution 5/1 of 5 September 2008 (A/HRC/WG.6/3/UZB/1, paragraph 50), a National Plan of Action on the Well-Being of Children 2007–11 was adopted and introduced as national policy. This long-term programme includes continuous monitoring and evaluation of the situation of children as regards education, health, recreation, the family, environment, employment, vocational training and protection against the adverse effects of modern life.

Article 7, paragraph 1. Sanctions. The Committee notes that section 135 of the Criminal Code provides that the trafficking of people outside of Uzbekistan for the purpose of engaging them in sexual or any other exploitation is a criminal offence punishable with imprisonment from five to ten years. It notes the Government’s information, however, that the Act of 16 September 2008 introduced amendments to section 135 of the Criminal Code concerning the grave offence of trafficking in persons and that, when such acts are committed in relation to persons known to the offender as being under 18 years of age, the sanction is increased. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of the sanction provided for in section 135 of the Criminal Code in practice. It also requests the Government to supply a copy of the Criminal Code as amended by the Act of 16 September 2008.

Article 7, paragraph 2. Effective and time-bound measures. Clause (a). Preventing the engagement of children in the worst forms of child labour. 
1. Sale and trafficking of children. The Committee notes that, in its concluding observations of 24 January 2006 (E/C.12/UZB/CO/1, paragraph 25), the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights expressed its concern that trafficking in persons is increasing in the State party and that it has now become both a country of origin and destination, as well as a transit point for trafficking in persons. It notes that, according to the Global Report on Trafficking in Persons of the UNODC of 2009, 12 child victims of trafficking were identified by state authorities in Uzbekistan in 2003, 16 in 2004, 38 in 2005 and 17 in 2006. The Committee also notes that, according to the national report submitted in accordance with paragraph 15(a) of the Annex to Human Rights Council Resolution 5/1 of 5 September 2008 (A/HRC/WG.6/3/UZB/1, paragraph 28), the Government acknowledged its awareness of how acute the problem of human trafficking is. In this regard, the Committee notes that the Act on the Prevention of Trafficking in Persons provides for the implementation of several measures to prevent trafficking in persons to be carried out by the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the National Security Service and the Ministry of Public Health, including organizing and implementing operational search activities for uncovering crimes; promoting cooperation with international organizations; providing information to the appropriate agencies regarding persons or organized groups that are involved in trafficking; undertaking measures for anticipating, exposing and putting an end to attempts to cross the national frontier by traffickers in persons and victims of trafficking; and providing information on the laws of Uzbekistan regarding the prevention of trafficking in persons to the appropriate agencies of foreign States. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the impact of the measures taken in the framework of the Act on the Prevention of Trafficking in Persons on preventing the sale and trafficking of children under 18 years for economic or sexual exploitation, and the results achieved.

2. Access to free basic education. The Committee notes that article 41 of the Constitution states that everyone shall have the right to education and that the State shall guarantee free secondary education. It notes that section 23 of the Act on Guarantees of the Rights of the Child provides that the State guarantees the child free of charge compulsory general secondary education as well as secondary special vocational education. The Committee further notes the Government’s information that, in accordance with the Education Act and the Act on the National Programme for the Training of Officials, the education system was reformed, providing for 12 years of free compulsory education for all children in the country.

In this regard, the Committee observes that, according to the UNICEF country profile on education in Uzbekistan (UNICEF country profile), the country has made considerable efforts to improve the quality of education through various measures, such as the elaboration of a National Personnel Training Programme in 1997, the adoption of a National Programme on School Education Development (2004–09) with the main objectives of improving the quality of education, and the adoption of a National Programme on Improving Quality and Efficiency of Education (2008–12). The UNICEF country profile indicates that access to primary and secondary education in Uzbekistan is therefore above average for the subregion and region. In primary school, the net enrolment rate is 97 per cent, while the net attendance rate is 95.8 per cent. The transition rate to secondary school is 100 per cent, indicating that the gap in access between primary and secondary is not significant, and the secondary school net enrolment rate is 93.1 per cent. The UNICEF country profile also indicates that no gender gaps remain in primary school enrolment, with a gender parity level of 1.00, and it is near closed in secondary school, with a parity ration of 0.98. However, the Committee notes the information in the UNICEF country profile that there is a gap in access to primary school for the richest and poorest quintiles of the population, and there is much concern that the gap is growing. With rising unemployment, poverty and informal costs of schooling, it is likely that the poorest segment of the population will be less able to pay for schooling and thus have reduced access to education. Considering that education contributes to preventing the engagement of children in the worst forms of child labour, the Committee encourages the Government to pursue its efforts to improve the functioning of the education system in the country, in particular by ensuring access to free basic education for the poorest segment of the population, particularly at the primary school level. It requests the Government to provide information on the progress made in this regard.

Clause (b). Assistance for the removal of children from the worst forms of child labour. National Rehabilitation Centre to provide assistance and protection for the victims of trafficking in persons (National Rehabilitation Centre). The Committee notes that sections 9 to 13 of the Act on the Prevention of Trafficking in Persons provide for the establishment of specialized institutions to ensure the protection of victims of trafficking and to provide them with assistance. The basic tasks and functions of these specialized institutions are to provide free assistance, protection and security to victims of trafficking, including children, favourable living conditions and personal hygiene, as well as food, medicine and medical appliances, the provision of urgent medical, psychological, social and legal assistance, help in establishing contact with relatives, information on their rights and lawful interests, and provision of assistance with social rehabilitation. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s information that, on 5 November 2008, it adopted a resolution on the “Formation of the National Rehabilitation Centre to provide assistance and protection for the victims of trafficking”. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the number of child victims of trafficking for sexual or economic exploitation who were rehabilitated and socially integrated through the National Rehabilitation Centre.

Clause (d). Children at special risk. Street children. The Committee notes that, in its concluding observations of 2 June 2006 (CRC/C/UZB/CO/2, paragraph 62), the Committee on the Rights of the Child shared the State party’s concern at the increasing number of street children. The Committee on the Rights of the Child also expressed its concern that these children do not have access to health and other services because they live in places where they have no residence registration. Considering that street children are particularly exposed to the worst forms of child labour, the Committee requests the Government to take effective and time-bound measures to ensure that these children are protected from the worst forms of child labour by withdrawing them from these vulnerable situations and rehabilitating them. It requests the Government to provide information on the progress made in this regard.

Article 8. International cooperation and assistance. 1. International cooperation. The Committee notes the Government’s information that Uzbekistan has adhered to the United Nations Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others and to the United Nations Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any steps taken to assist other member States or on assistance received giving effect to the provisions of the Convention through enhanced international cooperation and assistance on the issue of combating the trafficking of children.

2. Poverty reduction. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that, in order to comply with paragraph 18 of the NPA for the application of the ILO Conventions Nos 138 and 182, which provides for the implementation of permanent monitoring of the situation of children in “unfavourable families”, the situation of children in poor families is monitored quarterly. The Government indicates that a Plan of Measures was adopted on 21 October 2008 with a view to implement this paragraph which includes the identification and social protection of children in risk groups. In this regard, in 2008, the “Maxalla Fund surveyed over 1 million families in order to identify the poor ones. Noting that poverty reduction programmes contribute to breaking the poverty cycle, which is essential for the elimination of the worst forms of child labour, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken in the framework of the Plan of Measures of 21 October 2008 to protect children from poor families from the worst forms of child labour once they have been identified, and on the results achieved.

Parts IV and V of the report form. Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes that, in its concluding observations of 24 January 2006 (E/C.12/UZB/CO/1, paragraph 25), the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights expressed its concern about the lack of reliable information, including statistics, on the extent of the problem of trafficking in persons in Uzbekistan. The Committee notes that, in the framework of the NPA for the application of ILO Conventions Nos 138 and 182, activities are planned to ensure the collection of data about the number of occupied persons under 18 years of age though regular inspections and to ensure statistical accountability of the State (paragraphs 15 and 16). Finally, the Committee notes the Government’s information that the national statistical report for 2009, which includes statistics concerning workers under the age of 18 years, was approved by Resolution No. 5 of 10 November 2008 of the State Committee for Statistics. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the statistics collected in the national statistical report for 2009 concerning the employment of children under 18 years in the worst forms of child labour. The Committee further requests the Government to provide any other information about the application of the Convention in practice, including statistics on the nature, extent and trends of the worst forms of child labour, in particular child trafficking for labour or sexual exploitation, the number of children covered by the measures giving effect to the Convention, the number and nature of infringements reported, investigations, prosecutions, convictions and penal sanctions applied. To the extent possible, all information provided should be disaggregated by sex.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s first report. It also notes the communication of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) dated 26 August 2009.

Articles 3 and 7, paragraph 1, of the Convention. Worst forms of child labour and sanctions. Clauses (a) and (d). Forced or compulsory labour in cotton production and hazardous work. In its comments under the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention (No. 105), the Committee had previously noted the observations made by the Council of the Trade Unions Confederation of Uzbekistan, communicated by the Government with its 2004 report, which contained allegations concerning practices of the mobilization and use of labour for purposes of economic development in agriculture (cotton production), in which public sector workers, school children and university students are involved. In this regard, the Committee notes that the IOE confirms that the legal framework against the use of forced labour exists in Uzbekistan but that, despite this fact, there are continued reports by non-governmental organizations and the media denouncing the systemic and persistent use of forced labour, including forced child labour, in the cotton fields of Uzbekistan.

The Committee notes the allegation of the IOE that the mass mobilization of children was one of the characteristics of cotton production during the Soviet regime. Referring to several reports, the IOE indicates that, every year, hundreds of thousands of Uzbek school children are forced by the Government of Uzbekistan to work in the national harvest for up to three months. Estimates of the number of children forced to participate in the cotton harvest range from half a million to 1.5 million school children in grades 5 to 11. The IOE further reports that forced labour has a substantial negative impact upon the education of the country’s rural school children. Rural children are said to lag behind their urban peers in schooling, due to participation in the cotton harvest.

In this regard, the Committee notes that, in its concluding observations of 24 January 2006 (E/C.12/UZB/CO/1, paragraph 20), the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights expressed its concern about the persistent reports on the situation of school-age children obliged to participate in the cotton harvest every year who, for that reason, do not attend school during this period. The Committee also notes the concern expressed by the Committee on the Rights of the Child, in its concluding observations of 2 June 2006 (CRC/C/UZB/CO/2, paragraphs 64–65), about the involvement of the very many school-age children in the harvesting of cotton, which results in serious health problems such as intestinal and respiratory infections, meningitis and hepatitis. The Committee on the Rights of the Child therefore urged the Government to take all the necessary measures to ensure that the involvement of school-aged children in cotton harvesting is in full compliance with the international child labour standards, inter alia, in terms of their age, their working hours, their working conditions, their education and their health.

The Committee notes the Government’s information that article 37 of the Constitution of Uzbekistan directly prohibits any compulsory labour and that article 45 of the Constitution contains state guarantees of protection of the rights and interests of children. The Committee notes that section 7 of the Labour Code prohibits forced labour, i.e. the obligation to perform work under menace of applying any penalty (including as a means to maintain labour discipline). It further notes that section 138 of the Criminal Code provides that the forceful illegal deprivation of liberty shall be punished with a fine of up to 50 minimum monthly wages or correctional labour or imprisonment of up to three years. The same action committed with the placement of a victim in conditions endangering their life or health shall be punished with imprisonment from three to five years. Furthermore, the Committee notes that, pursuant to section 241 of the Labour Code prohibiting the employment of persons under 18 years of age in work in unfavourable conditions and work which may harm their health, safety or morality, the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection (MoLSP) and the Ministry of Health, in consultation with the social partners, adopted the “List of occupations with unfavourable working conditions in which it is forbidden to employ persons under 18 years of age” of 30 May 2001, which provides that children under 18 years of age are forbidden from watering and gathering cotton by hand. In this regard, the Committee notes that section 49 of the Administrative Responsibility Code provides that an infraction of labour and occupational safety legislation shall entail a fine of from two to five times the minimum wage.

The Committee expresses its serious concern at the situation of children who, every year, are taken from school for up to three months and made to work in the cotton fields in hazardous conditions. It observes that, although national legislation appears to prohibit forced labour and hazardous work in cotton production, this remains a serious issue of concern in practice. The Committee refers to the Universal Periodic Review of Uzbekistan of 9 March 2009 (A/HRC/10/83, paragraph 106(8) and (27)), in which, in response to the recommendations that Uzbekistan do its utmost to eliminate forced child labour, intensify its efforts to effectively implement the national legislation and stop the practice of sending school-age children to participate in the harvesting of cotton, the Government indicated that measures are already being implemented or have already been implemented and will further be considered. In this regard, the Committee recalls that, by virtue of Article 3(a) and (d) of the Convention, forced labour and hazardous work are considered as worst forms of child labour and that, by virtue of Article 1 of the Convention, member States are required to take immediate and effective measures to secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour, as a matter of urgency. Furthermore, the Committee recalls that, by virtue of Article 7(1), of the Convention, ratifying countries are required to ensure the effective implementation and enforcement of the provisions giving effect to the Convention, including through the provision and application of penal sanctions.

The Committee therefore strongly urges the Government to take effective and time-bound measures to eradicate the forced labour of, or hazardous work by, children under 18 years in cotton production, as a matter of urgency. In this regard, it requests the Government to take immediate measures to ensure that thorough investigations and robust prosecutions of offenders are carried out and that effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions are imposed in practice. It requests the Government to provide information on the progress made in this regard in its next report.

Article 6. Action programmes. National Action Plan (NPA) for the application of ILO Conventions Nos 138 and 182. The Committee notes that, according to the IOE, in September 2008, the Uzbek Prime Minister signed a decree that bans child labour in cotton plantations in Uzbekistan and approves a NPA to eradicate child labour. In this regard, the Committee notes that the NPA for the application of ILO Conventions Nos 138 and 182 includes the following paragraphs on activities specifically regarding the forced labour of children, in particular in the agricultural sector:

(a)   Monitoring and control of the prohibition of the use of pupils of schools of general education, vocational colleges and academic lyceums, in forced labour (paragraph 12).

(b)   Public control of the prohibition of the use of forced child labour in territories of self-governing bodies of citizens (paragraph 14).

(c)   Establishing a working group to monitor locally the prohibition of the use of forced labour in cotton picking of pupils in schools of general education, including public schools, and submitting analytical information to the Cabinet on the results of this monitoring (paragraph 20).

(d)   Acceptance of a joint statement on the inadmissibility of the use of forced child labour in agricultural works by the Association of Farm Entities, the Council of Federation of trade unions in Uzbekistan and the MoLSP (paragraph 29).

(e)   Informing farmers on matters relating to the prohibition of violating legislation on the engagement of children in agricultural works (paragraph 33).

While noting the measures enumerated in the framework of the NPA for the application of ILO Conventions Nos 138 and 182, the Committee notes the allegation of the IOE according to which it remains uncertain if the implementation of these recently adopted measures will be sufficient to address the deeply rooted practice of forced child labour in the cotton fields. The Committee urges the Government to take immediate measures to ensure that the activities envisaged in the abovementioned NPA pertaining to the prohibition and elimination of the use of forced child labour in the agricultural sector are effectively implemented, as a matter of urgency, and to provide information on the results achieved.

In this regard, the Committee invites the Government to avail itself of ILO technical assistance on the assessment to be made on the effective implementation of the NPA for the application of ILO Conventions Nos 138 and 182.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

[The Government is asked to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 99th Session and to reply in detail to the present comments in 2010.]