Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2022, Publication: 110th ILC session (2022)

Written information provided by the Government

The Committee requests the Government to indicate in what manner it ensures that effect is given to the Convention with respect to public officials.

A preliminary draft of an Act on union organization was prepared and considered by the Council of State. The Council returned the draft for discussion by the relevant parties and there was liaison with the ILO on the preparation of a preliminary version of the draft so that it might come into line with the relevant international Conventions and thus be invigorated and returned to legislative force. Under the oversight of the ILO, the Ministry held a workshop concerning the Act attended by all the representatives of the labour unions in Iraq for the purpose of arriving at a definitive version of the preliminary draft of the Act and of seeing that it achieves its proper function in law.

The Government requests the ILO to provide technical assistance in preparing the Act and in trade union capacity-building and promoting the activation of the Conventions relating to union freedom.

The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the sanctions actually imposed in cases of anti-union discrimination are sufficiently dissuasive. In this regard, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the sanctions imposed in practice.

The sanctions that are imposed in practice match those penalties stipulated in the Labour Code, and which include those mentioned in section 11(2); no scope is given for deviation from the provisions of the Labour Code. In light of the existing amendment to the Labour Code (which is under discussion), the matter of sanctions will be discussed with the social partners.

The Committee requests the Government to specify which remedies may be imposed by the Labour Court in such cases, indicating in particular whether the Court is empowered to reinstate the dismissed workers in their positions.

The Labour Code gives workers the right to appeal a severance decision before the severance committee formed pursuant to Instruction No. 4 of 2017.

They may also appeal the severance decision in court within 30 days of being informed of the termination of their service, as per the provisions of section 46(1) of the Labour Code.

A worker is deemed to have waived his right to appeal if he does not submit it within this period. In choosing one of these remedies, he forfeits his right to the other one.

The severance committee’s decision may be appealed against in the labour court within 30 days of the worker being informed of the decision.

If the committee or the court finds that the termination of the worker’s service is contrary to the conditions for terminating the labour contract as specified in section 43 of the Labour Code, they may order the reinstatement of the worker or the restitution of all wages owed to him since the termination of the work contract.

The Committee requests the Government to provide information regarding the length of the procedure to treat complaints against acts of anti-union discrimination and its application in practice.

The length of the period for the treatment of a complaint lodged by a worker concerning labour disputes over existing rights is in accordance with the application of the provisions of the Labour Code, which is within 30 days of the complaint being submitted as per section 157(4).

If the complaint concerns a collective dispute over future interests, the length of the period specified for resolution of the dispute is up to 48 hours from the date on which the request for this is received, during which an appointment to hear the dispute must be fixed.

The length of the period for settling the dispute is seven days from the expiry of the 48‑hour period as per the provisions of section 161(3) and (4) concerning the settling of disputes.

In all the above situations, cases involving labour issues are deemed to be urgent actions, as per section 166(iii).

Three hotlines have also been opened for receiving workers’ complaints and forwarding them to the labour inspectorate, which deals with them as a matter of urgency and works to resolve any problem amicably before having recourse to the competent courts. The hotlines have proved to be successful in this regard.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether other laws or regulations explicitly prohibit acts of interference and provide for rapid procedures and sufficiently decisive sanctions against such acts, including sanctions pertaining to the establishment of workers’ or employers’ organizations and to adequate protection against any acts of interference.

Section 22(III) of the 2005 Constitution of the Republic of Iraq states: “The State shall guarantee the right to form and join unions and professional associations and this shall be regulated by law.”

It is also stated in the provisions of section 42(1)(k) of the Labour Code that the range of rights afforded to workers includes the “freedom to create and join trade unions”.

With regard to information concerning the measures taken or envisaged to promote collective bargaining, the number of collective agreements concluded and in force in the country, as well as the sectors concerned and the number of workers covered by these agreements, there is a specific part of the Labour Code (that is Chapter 15) regulating everything pertaining to collective agreements and bargaining. This chapter defines all the measures for concluding collective work agreements or entering into collective bargaining free from interference by any party (see sections 146–156 of the Code), although it should be noted that, to date, no collective agreements have been concluded or are in force in the State.

Recommendations: Iraq is in urgent need of trade union capacity-building and of promoting the activation of the Conventions relating to union freedom.

Discussion by the Committee

Interpretation from Arabic: Government representative – The Government has noted the observations of the Committee of Experts, and I would like to point out the following. My Government has ratified 68 Conventions, including 8 fundamental Conventions. We also ratified Convention No. 98 in 1962, and we are continuing to discuss and collaborate with the Committee of Experts, the Baghdad Office, the Regional Office in Beirut and the ILO in Geneva in order to reach an optimal implementation of these Conventions. I must admit that we are extremely surprised by the inclusion of Iraq on the shortlist.

Iraq, since 2003, has seen major developments and a new Constitution was adopted in 2005. The Constitution is based on the freedom and equal treatment of all citizens without any discrimination, and it guarantees the right to organize in all its forms. Important developments occurred with respect to freedom of expression, the promulgation of a law on political parties, and the holding of elections every four years, whereby members of the Parliament are elected by Iraqi citizens and Parliament consequently appoints the executive.

Following these transformations, however, we faced major challenges and terrorist attacks, which did not distinguish between one category of the population and another and, despite all these challenges, Iraq was able to take important strides to adopt new legislation, which are in conformity with the Constitution and the new era. Thus, Labour Code No. 37 of 2015 was adopted. It provides for the first time for the most representative trade union organizations and allocates an entire chapter to collective bargaining, and occupational health and safety, so as to protect workers’ rights in conformity with ILO Conventions. The Code was promulgated with continuous ILO assistance, which eventually led to the ratification of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), in 2018.

Since Law No. 52 of 1987 is of a general nature and its provisions are not in conformity with Conventions Nos 87 and 98, the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs called for the establishment of a committee by virtue of a Diwani Order to prepare a new draft law. Thus, Diwani Order No. 18 of 2018 was promulgated, establishing a committee under my chairmanship, with the membership of trade unions, some of which have presented this case to the ILO. But we have to bear in mind that the adoption of a new law needs to go through different stages before its final adoption as a result of the separation between the powers of the State. Thus, work went ahead and a draft law on trade union organizations for workers and employees in Iraq was prepared.

Furthermore, the Ministry has adopted a new policy in dealing with the situation. It has kept the same distance from all trade unions, while waiting for the promulgation of a new law.

With respect to the request by the Committee of Experts to take the necessary measures to ensure that the sanctions actually imposed in cases of anti-union discrimination are sufficiently dissuasive, we would like to recall here that the sanctions imposed are in line with the enacted law, including section 11(2) and, of course, I have to remind you all that this section will be the subject of an amendment once the new law is presented to Parliament, in consultation with the social partners. There is also the Committee’s request to specify the remedies which may be imposed by the labour tribunal in such cases, indicating in particular whether the tribunal is empowered to reinstate dismissed workers in their positions.

The Labour Code grants the right to workers to appeal against a termination decision before the Committee on Termination of Service, which was set up by virtue of Instruction No. 4 of 2017, or before the court within 30 days as of the date on which a worker is notified of his/her termination based on section 46(1) of the Labour Code.

A worker would be considered to have rescinded the right of appeal if he/she does not submit it within the deadline and if one of the parties chooses one option he/she loses the right to use the other option.

The decision of the Committee on Termination of Service can be appealed against before the Labour Court within 30 days as of the date of the worker’s notification.

If the Committee or Court finds that a worker’s termination is different from the reasons for the termination of a labour contract, as specified in section 43 of the Labour Code, it will consequently decide to reinstate the worker and pay him/her full wages for the period since his/her labour contract was terminated.

There is also the request by the Committee of Experts to provide information on the length of the procedure to treat complaints against acts of anti-union discrimination and its application in practice. The periods required by the procedures to treat a complaint submitted by a worker and which concern labour conflicts on existing rights is related to the application of the sections of the law, which is 30 days as of the date on which the complaint was submitted, as specified in section 157(4) of the Code.

In the case of a complaint which is related to a collective conflict involving future interests, the set period to resolve a conflict is 48 hours so as to identify a date on which to examine the conflict as of the day on which the request was received and seven days to decide on the conflict as of the date on which 48 hours ends to decide finally on the conflict as specified in section 161(3) and (4).

In view of these points, labour cases are considered urgent actions based on paragraph 3 of section 166.

This leads me to the request by the Committee of Experts to indicate whether there are other laws or regulations which explicitly prohibit acts of interference in the process of establishing workers’ trade unions or employers’ organizations and provide for rapid procedures and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions against such acts of interference. I would like to recall here that in the Constitution of 2005, section 22(III) specifies that the State shall guarantee the right to form and join trade unions and professional associations, and this shall be regulated by law.

This is in addition to section 42(1)(k), which also includes the cluster of rights granted by the Labour Code to workers on their freedom to establish and join trade unions.

With respect to the Committee’s request to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to promote collective bargaining, the number of collective agreements concluded and in force in the country, as well as the sectors concerned and the number of workers covered by these agreements, I would like to bring to the Committee’s attention that there is an entire chapter in the labour law, Chapter 15, which includes any matter related to collective bargaining and collective agreements. In this Chapter, all measures are outlined whereby collective bargaining or negotiations can be conducted without any intervention from any outside party, in sections 146–156. It is to be noted here that there are still no collective agreements which have been concluded or are in force in the country.

I would like to point out here that, in order to solve all these issues, negotiations and continued dialogue should take place and of course we would like to avail ourselves of the technical assistance of the ILO.

Employer members – In terms of background details, as we all know, Convention No. 98 is a fundamental Convention. It is classified as up to date, so it is not part of the revision work that the Standards Review Mechanism is looking at. Iraq ratified the Convention in November 1962, which was a long time ago. This case has only been discussed by the Committee once before in 2008, although the Committee of Experts has made 20 observations on this case in the past.

Iraq was discussed in the Committee in 2008, well before it ratified Convention No. 87 in 2017. That discussion focused on the observations made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in 2006 and violations of trade union and collective bargaining rights, serious cases of violence and other violations of freedom of association and the views of the Committee of Experts on the new draft Labour Code, which had not yet been adopted.

The Committee in its conclusions noted the Government’s statement regarding the ongoing process of reconstruction and the climate of violence in the country. It further noted that the draft Labour Code, prepared with the assistance of the ILO, was presently before the Shura Council, as well as the Government’s statement that: (a) it would take the comments of the Committee of Experts on board before proceeding with its adoption; and (b) that despite the current absence of an appropriate legislative framework governing the right to organize, trade unions were in fact able to carry out their activities without interference.

The Committee also took note of the statement made by the Iraqi Workers’ delegate on the difficulties faced in organizing workers and the interference workers’ organizations encountered in their activities, including the freezing of trade union assets. The Committee noted similar concerns by Iraqi employers’ organizations, observing that a draft Labour Code had been prepared some time ago with the assistance of the ILO; the Committee expressed the firm hope the draft Code would be modified along the lines requested by the Committee of Experts in full consultation with the social partners and would be adopted without delay. In the meantime, the Committee called on the Government to ensure that the laws and practice of the previous regime were no longer applied.

The Committee considered that the application of this Convention and vigorous efforts to develop extensive and meaningful social dialogue were important building blocks in the process of reconstruction ongoing in the country. It hoped that it would be in a position in the near future to observe that all workers, including public servants not engaged in the administration of the State, could fully enjoy the effective protection of the provisions of the Convention.

Welcoming the Government’s request for ILO technical assistance, the Committee urged it to accept an ILO technical assistance mission in the near future. That was in 2008.

Moving forward now to 2017. The Committee of Experts noted with interest the approval of the ratification of Convention No. 87 in November 2017. Noting the late receipt of the Government’s report, the Committee of Experts also observed that the Government had reported the adoption of the new Labour Code in 2015. The Committee of Experts said it would examine the Government’s report and the new legislation at its next session in order to evaluate its conformity with the Convention and ensure that the comments made by the Committee of Experts regarding the previous legislation had been taken into consideration.

This brings us to the present day and the present report. In its observation in the report now before the Committee, the Committee of Experts, with respect to the scope of the Convention, notes that section 3 of the Labour Code stipulates that its provisions do not apply to public officials appointed in accordance with the Civil Service Law or a special legal text, and members of the internal security forces. It requests the Government to indicate in what manner it ensures that effect is given to the Convention with respect to public officials not engaged in the administration of the State who are excluded from the application of the Labour Code.

With respect to Article 1 of the Convention, which provides for protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions, the Committee of Experts considers that the amount of the fine provided in section 11(2) of the Labour Code – 1 million Iraqi dinars, which is approximately US$685 – may not be adequate to deter and prevent the repetition of acts of anti-union discrimination. It requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the sanctions imposed in cases of anti-union discrimination are sufficiently dissuasive and to provide information on the sanctions imposed in practice.

With respect to anti-union dismissal, the Committee of Experts notes that section 145 of the Labour Code provides that when the penalty of dismissal has been imposed on a worker, such a decision may be challenged within 30 days before the Labour Court. It notes, however, that the Labour Code does not specify which sanctions are applicable in the event of an anti-union dismissal. The Committee of Experts requests the Government to specify which remedies may be imposed by the Labour Court in such cases, indicating in particular whether the Court is empowered to reinstate the dismissed workers in their positions.

With respect to rapid appeal procedures, the Committee of Experts requests the Government to provide information regarding the length of the procedure to treat complaints against acts of anti-union discrimination and its application in practice.

With respect to Article 2, which provides for protection against acts of interference, the Committee of Experts notes that the Labour Code does not contain any provisions which explicitly prohibit acts of interference. It requests the Government to indicate whether other laws or regulations explicitly prohibit acts of interference and provide for rapid procedures and sufficiently decisive sanctions against such acts.

As we have heard from the Government, the Government has responded to all of these requests in writing and we will not therefore repeat the response because we think we heard it very clearly, concisely and comprehensively from the Government. With that, we will turn to my concluding remarks.

To sum up, if we look at the timeline of this case in particular, it is clear that progress has been slow. A Labour Code was drafted in 2003, it was before the Shura in 2008, but not adopted until 2015. Convention No. 87 was ratified in 2017 and this is the first time Iraq’s application of Convention No. 98 is in fact being fully examined. It is fair to say that this is a case in which progress has been made but, as in so many cases like this, more needs to be done.

Here, the Employer members note that technical assistance was provided during the process of drafting the Labour Code in 2003 and, looking at the Committee of Experts’ observations, it seems possible that some of the guidance provided during the process of drafting the Code was lost in translation and during its subsequent finalization and passage into law. With that in mind, the Employer members urge the Government of Iraq to take note of the Committee of Experts’ observations and work with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations to close the apparent gaps between the Labour Code and the basic requirements of Convention No. 98.

If, as it has itself requested, Iraq again avails itself of the technical assistance accessible through the ILO, the Government might find that it is able to complete many, if not most, of the recommended actions in time for a favourable report the next time the Committee of Experts reports on Convention No. 98.

Worker members – Iraq needs to be discussed again in our Committee. This time it is under Convention No. 98. The Committee of Experts’ report shows that many difficulties persist in the implementation of the Convention. We have just heard the Government make a number of points and try to make it sound like things are going in the right direction. The reality is quite different. A number of points that have been and will be raised are also related to Convention No. 87, but as everyone knows Conventions Nos 87 and 98 are closely linked and complementary, so it is justified to address them.

The first issue we wish to address concerns the scope of the right to collective bargaining. Indeed, civil servants do not fall within the scope of the Labour Code. However, it is this text that contains the provisions that give effect to Convention No. 98. The consequence is that as things stand, a significant category of workers is deprived of their rights in this area. They include teachers, employees of public enterprises and the decentralized institutions.

In this respect, the Revolutionary Command Council Resolution No. 150 of 1987 states in section 10 that trade unions are limited to the private sector and are not allowed in the public sector. Section 2 of the Trade Unions Organizations Act No. 52 of 1987 includes the same provision. Similarly, several ministerial instructions and circulars prohibit the founding of trade unions in the public sector and prevent collective bargaining. It should be noted that we are talking about a country where the public sector plays an important and vital role.

The second problem we wish to highlight concerns the numerous acts of discrimination suffered by trade union activists. It should be recalled that Article 1(b) of the Convention provides protection for the worker against dismissal or any other prejudice by any other means because of his or her trade union membership or participation in trade union activities.

We must denounce many prejudicial measures taken against workers solely and only because of their trade union activities. Colleagues will discuss specific examples, but I can already indicate that the spectrum of these acts of discrimination is very broad. It ranges from ministerial decisions that exclude certain organizations to individual disciplinary measures taken against trade union activists.

The Government claims that the current legislative arsenal provides for sanctions against acts of discrimination. It also states that legal changes are under way in this regard. The Worker members insist that the changes introduced should result in truly dissuasive sanctions. The judicial process must also offer all guarantees of impartiality, and of course must be accessible. We also ask the Government to collect data on the number of complaints handled, the decisions taken and their consequences.

A careful analysis of the situation reveals the root cause of the acts of discrimination that we are denouncing here. Indeed, we observe that these acts are the result of the Government’s desire to organize and maintain a system of trade union monopoly. This results from section 21 of the Trade Unions Act No. 52 of 1987, which provides that the General Federation of Trade Unions is the supreme body for the trade unions. It is clear that the main purpose of the facts and practices reported here is to prevent the emergence of alternative trade union organizations. These acts of discrimination extend to intimidation of peaceful trade union protests. Activists are interrogated by the police and accused of illegal trade union activities.

We strongly recall that respect for freedom of association and the right to organize is incompatible with a climate of violence and intimidation. We call on the Government to make the necessary legislative changes and to guarantee all workers the rights and protections provided by the Convention.

Government member, France – I have the honour of speaking on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its Member States. The candidate country, Albania, and the European Free Trade Association country, Norway, Member of the European Economic Area, as well as the Republic of Moldova, align themselves with this statement.

The EU and its Member States are committed to the promotion, protection, respect and fulfilment of human rights, including labour rights, such as the right to organize and collective bargaining.

We actively promote the universal ratification and implementation of fundamental international labour standards, including Convention No. 98.

We support the ILO in its indispensable role of developing, promoting and supervising the application of ratified international labour standards and of fundamental Conventions in particular.

The EU and its Member States are long-term partners of Iraq. In response to the many challenges Iraq is facing after years of conflict, in 2018 the EU adopted a new strategy for Iraq to support the Government's efforts towards stabilization, reconstruction, reconciliation and development. The EU and Iraq have also signed a comprehensive Partnership and Cooperation Agreement.

We welcome the fact that the Government provided updated information ahead of this meeting.

While taking note of the observations provided, we note with concern the observations of the Committee of Experts recalling the need to remove any obstacles to trade union pluralism, as well as to ensure that the rights in the Convention are applicable to all public servants not engaged in the administration of the State.

With regard to the scope of application of the Convention, we recall that all workers, without distinction whatsoever, including public sector workers, regardless of whether the service is essential, are covered by the Convention. The extent to which the Convention applies to the armed forces and the police is to be determined by national laws or regulations.

With regard to public sector workers, we would like to stress that all other persons employed by the Government, by public enterprises or by autonomous public enterprises are covered by the Convention and should therefore benefit from the guarantees provided for in the Convention. Regrettably, section 3 of the Labour Code does not respect this coverage by excluding all public officials appointed in accordance with the Civil Service Law or a special legal text. We urge the Government to amend the Labour Code so that it is in conformity with the Convention.

The EU and its Member States also draw attention to the importance of protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and take note of the provisions in the Iraqi Labour Code. We echo the call of the Committee of Experts for the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the sanctions actually imposed in cases of anti-union discrimination are sufficiently dissuasive.

We ask the Government to provide additional information on the implementation of these provisions in practice, as well as on the remedies that may be imposed in cases of unlawful anti-union dismissal and the length of the procedure to treat complaints against acts of anti-union discrimination.

Finally, in the absence of such provisions in the Labour Code, we reiterate the request by the Committee of Experts to provide information on the legal provisions explicitly prohibiting any acts of interference in the establishment, functioning or administration of workers’ and employers’ organizations.

The EU and its Member States remain committed to our close cooperation and partnership with Iraq and look forward to continuing joint efforts with the Government and the ILO to improve labour standards for all in Iraq, in particular the implementation of the fundamental Conventions.

Interpretation from Arabic: Worker member, Tunisia – Thank you for giving me the floor to discuss the case of Iraq on behalf of the General Federation of Tunisian Workers. We are aware of the trials experienced by the people of Iraq as a result of wars, and then the blockade and finally the murderous conflicts that have led to the loss of millions of workers, their property and livelihoods.

We believe that the procedure for the recovery and development of their trade union rights is part of the process of national reconstruction, the reinforcement of its stability and the development of labour legislation that is in conformity with international labour standards and responds to the claims of Iraqi workers and their trade union movement.

In this regard, the unions have called for the revision of several chapters of Law No. 52/1987 with a view to eliminating all forms of discrimination, ensuring the protection of workers, bringing an end to interference in the internal affairs of trade unions and guaranteeing the right to freedom of association and collective bargaining.

The Labour Code has been revised in order to give trade union members and workers all their rights. We call on the Government to cease all interference with and provide protection for workers. We have noted the information provided by the Government and we see that the efforts made are along the right lines.

It is extremely important to bring an end to discrimination against workers, irrespective of the reason for such discrimination. We call on the Government to repeal the laws which allow discrimination against workers and those that deny them freedom in the exercise of their trade union activities. We ask the Government to give full effect to the Convention and to bring an end to the abusive dismissal of trade union members.

In light of these abuses, we are bound to reiterate our call for the Government to amend the Labour Code and to do that in dialogue with workers’ and employers’ organizations, and to allow the reinstatement of trade union members who have been dismissed. We reaffirm the need to give effect to all the provisions of the Convention in order to allow trade union pluralism and prevent any interference in trade union activities.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government member, Egypt – We have taken note of all the measures taken by the Government to bring its national legislation into conformity with the Convention, as well as its efforts to enact a new law which guarantees freedom of association, trade union pluralism and the absence of discrimination.

We know that Iraq has ratified a large number of Conventions and that it is committed to observing the protection of the civil, economic, cultural, political, social and labour rights of the Iraqi people. We have taken due note of the laws adopted by the State of Iraq which protect the rights of Iraqis, such as Labour Law No. 37 of 2015, which includes an entire chapter on collective bargaining and other provisions which protect workers’ rights in the event of termination of service.

In conclusion, we would like to express our appreciation of the efforts made by the Government to bring the legislation into conformity with the provisions of the Convention and we hope that the Committee will recognize the efforts being made by the country in its conclusions and respond to its request for technical assistance.

Worker member, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland – We note that it is the responsibility of governments to create conditions in law and practice in which unions and employers can freely bargain. However, as we have heard, not only does the Iraqi Government provide insufficient disincentives for anti-union discrimination in the workplace, but it actively works against conditions that are conducive to collective bargaining.

We all know of the damage caused by the sense of impunity granted by negligence or collusion of governments in the suppression of free trade union activity. Rather than addressing this imperative, we see the Iraqi Government perpetuating a climate of fear. When thousands of workers in the energy sector demonstrated peacefully to demand their workplace rights, security forces brutally dispersed the protests. Similarly, another peaceful protest on 14 February ended in violent attacks by the police and the arrest of two trade unionists. In this climate of impunity, one employee at an oil facility was killed by organized crime gangs following continuous attacks against independent trade unions. A ministry terminated the contract of one electricity worker for organizing a protest against job cuts. Six hundred and fifty oil workers were dismissed after seeking collective bargaining and, when they protested peacefully, were beaten by the police with batons. On 31 March, electricity workers protested peacefully about the employment conditions they had tried to raise with management. The subsequent police crackdown left hundreds injured.

In the discussion of the General Report, I noted that a company had weighed the likely cost of punishment for breaking labour laws against future wage savings, and knowingly broke the regulations. How much more likely is such cynical behaviour if a company thinks that, instead of being punished by the Government, it might be applauded. Indeed, recently two leaders of the General Federation of Iraqi Trade Unions (GFITU) who sought collective bargaining, were instead reassigned by their company to jobs they did not want as punishment.

Finally, we note the interdependence of the fundamental principles and, in particular, the centrality of respect for Convention No. 87 in providing the necessary foundations for giving effect to Convention No. 98. By allowing, and indeed propagating, a climate of fear in which anti-union violence is commonplace, the Government of Iraq is undermining the necessary conditions for workers’ organizations, free of interference, to engage in collective bargaining, something we hope it will urgently address.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government member, Qatar – We listened very carefully to the statement made by the Government of Iraq with reference to the Convention. We wish to state that we appreciate the efforts being made to ensure that Iraq is in compliance with the provisions of the Convention and we note that there is a bill on trade union organization which is currently under discussion with the ILO and workers’ organizations. This reflects the Government’s keenness to bring its legislation into conformity with the provisions of Convention No. 98, in accordance with the Iraqi Constitution, which guarantees the freedom to establish workers’ organizations. We note that the Government is seeking to strengthen the system of complaints mechanisms available to workers so as to enable them to appeal when they feel that there has been discrimination against them.

We support the Government’s request for ILO technical assistance in drafting the legislation in question, for capacity-building and to take the necessary operational measures to put into effect the Convention. We also believe that further assistance could help to give effect to other provisions of the Convention. We would commend the efforts that are being undertaken and we believe they should be further supported. We also support the statement made by the Government of Iraq in that regard.

Worker member, United States of America – The American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organisations (AFL–CIO) has been working with Iraqi trade unions on labour law issues for many years. While there has been some progress in that time, including the 2015 Labour Code, the fact remains that the rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining remain deeply constrained in Iraq.

As noted in the Committee of Experts’ comments on Iraq for Conventions Nos 87 and 98, the existence of a trade union monopoly violates these fundamental Conventions. In practice, independent unions are therefore largely unable to build membership and bargain collectively.

On 20 January 2021, the Supreme Judicial Council refused to appoint a judge to oversee the running of the provincial elections of the GFITU, reiterating that the Iraqi Government only recognizes the General Federation of Iraqi Workers (GFIW). One pernicious practice used over the course of many years to frustrate collective bargaining is the issuance of government administrative orders directing ministries to only bargain with the government-approved GFIW. Given the role and importance of the public sector in Iraq, orders to government agencies to refuse to bargain affect a very large number of workers. For example, on 12 October 2020, the Iraqi Ministry of Labour issued Administrative Order No. 11367, instructing government administrative bodies not to deal with unions other than the government-approved GFIW. Following Administrative Order No. 11367, several ministries issued circulars to implement this policy. On 11 July 2021, the Ministry of Electricity issued a directive banning all trade union committees and instructed employees in publicly owned companies not to engage with such committees or face discipline under the amended Penal Code No. 111 of 1999, among other laws.

Clearly much work remains to be done by the Government of Iraq to come into compliance with Convention No. 98.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government member, Algeria – The Algerian delegation thanks the representative of the Government of Iraq for the statement on the implementation of the Convention. We take due note of the information provided by the Government representative according to which the reform of the Labour Code, prepared by the Tripartite Advisory Commission, is intended to promote collective bargaining in the public service, protect trade union delegates against anti-union acts, strengthen the dissuasive sanctions to be imposed in the event of anti-union discrimination and interference in the operation of union organizations.

My country also notes positively that the Government remains attached to the ILO’s principles with a view to strengthening trade union freedoms and indicates that this commitment will be maintained. These measures clearly show that the new approach in Iraq is well founded, and would gain from greater ILO support, in light of the obligations deriving from the Convention.

We hope that the consultations that are being held on the improvement of protection against abusive dismissals, including anti-union dismissals, will take into account the comments made by the Committee of Experts on the application of Article 1 of the Convention.

Finally, we urge the ILO to provide technical assistance and support to the Government to help it in the process of bringing the law and practice into conformity with the provisions of the Convention. We hope that this assistance will be results-oriented and we consider in this respect that the provisions of the Convention and the comments of the Committee of Experts provide a solid basis.

Interpretation from Arabic: Worker member, Syrian Arab Republic – Iraq is a Member of the ILO and as such it respects the Constitution of the ILO. That being so, it has taken the legislative steps required to give effect to ratified Conventions. We consider that the provisions of Convention No. 98 are not in contradiction with the provisions of the Labour Code and are indeed in line with the legislative principles that govern the situation of workers in Iraq.

We believe that all the steps required to give effect to the Convention have been taken. We know that Iraq is now working on new legislation to guarantee trade union pluralism, non-discrimination and the full exercise of trade union rights.

However, the Labour Code contains provisions which guarantee freedom of association and collective bargaining, in addition to providing for other rights which protect workers against termination and their right to join the most representative trade union. We therefore commend Iraq for its efforts to give effect to the Convention and to bring its legislation into full conformity with international labour standards. We believe that the ILO needs to provide further technical assistance to allow Iraq to do even more and ensure the appropriate implementation of the Convention.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government member, Oman – We would like to thank the Government of Iraq for the measures taken in cooperation with the social partners to promote the implementation of the Convention.

The Government of Oman would like to recognize the progress that has been made in this area. We also welcome the fact that the Government is of a mind to continue with the implementation of the Convention by bringing its legislation into line with the provisions of the Convention, and we certainly recognize the progress made in the area of legislation, particularly the laws relating to trade union organizations, the Labour Code and a number of ministerial decrees which strengthen Iraq’s observance of international labour standards. We also welcome the measures in effect in Iraq, despite the huge post-pandemic challenges and the pandemic which has had an impact on all countries and particularly on developing countries. As you know, Iraq has ratified Convention No. 87, which strengthens freedom of association in Iraq. We would still invite the Government to continue its efforts to protect the rights of workers and promote trade union activities in the country. We hope that the ILO will continue to provide technical assistance to help the tripartite constituents provide and guarantee decent work.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government member, Morocco – Allow me to first thank the Government of Iraq for the information and clarifications provided. We commend the Government for the efforts made to respond to the observations and comments of the Committee of Experts. On this occasion, we welcome the efforts made by this Committee for the supervision of international labour standards.

These remarks relate to the need to take measures for the adoption of dissuasive sanctions in the event of anti-union discrimination in the establishment of occupational organizations of workers and employers and to prevent interference in the internal affairs of these organizations.

Having heard the Government’s replies to these observations, we note positively that the Government has taken a series of measures in relation to the Convention, including the preparation of new legislation to guarantee the freedom to organize unions, which encourages pluralism and prohibits anti-union discrimination and interference in the internal affairs of these organizations.

We also note that the Government is working to ensure the conformity of the national legislation with international labour standards, including the Labour Code No. 37 of 2015, which explicitly provides for collective bargaining in a chapter covering this subject, and the protection of workers’ rights in the event of termination of their employment.

In conclusion, the Government of Morocco supports the position of the Government of Iraq in its cooperation with the ILO with a view to reforming trade union representation, and the Kingdom of Morocco recommends it to pursue its efforts for the adoption of a new law that takes into account the concerns of the workers.

Government member, Pakistan – Pakistan appreciates Iraq’s commitment to the implementation of international labour standards. We have taken note of the Government’s proposal to enhance its compliance with the relevant Convention in consultation with the ILO. Pakistan welcomes the recommendations of the Committee of Experts and Iraq’s willingness to accept capacity-building and technical assistance from the ILO to introduce the necessary improvements in its legislative and administrative framework.

It is the responsibility of every government to create a conducive environment for the well-being and welfare of its people and national circumstances should be respected. In this regard, we are pleased to note that the Government of Iraq is undertaking steps to promote social dialogue with the relevant stakeholders. For the future, we support Iraq’s constructive engagement with the ILO and encourage social dialogue in the spirit of tripartite mechanisms that recognize the steps under way to address the existing observations.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government member, Saudi Arabia – The delegation of Saudi Arabia, welcomes the efforts that have been made by the Government of Iraq and the measures that have been taken to bring national law into line with the Convention, as well as the efforts for the enactment of relevant legislation in this area. We also welcome the provisions of Labour Code No. 37 of 2015, which is currently in force, and which includes sections that guarantee all rights of workers.

In conclusion, we welcome the fact that the Government of Iraq stands ready to avail itself of ILO technical assistance in order to ensure a better application of the Convention.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government member, Libya – The delegation of my country wishes to begin by applauding the efforts made by the Government of Iraq with reference to the Convention. We also commend the Government’s efforts to draft new legislation to guarantee freedom of association in the country while eliminating all obstacles to the full implementation of that legislation.

We commend the fact that the Government stands ready to accept further technical assistance from the ILO concerning this Convention, and we think that it is indeed appropriate. We therefore call on the ILO to provide technical assistance to Iraq to ensure that it can give full effect to the Convention and the rights enshrined therein.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government member, Syrian Arab Republic – At the outset, allow us to thank the representative of Iraq for having provided the information that we have heard today. With regard to the information provided on the efforts made to apply the provisions of the Convention and the adoption of the necessary measures in this regard, my delegation would like to support Iraq in its readiness to avail itself of ILO technical assistance with a view to the better application of ILO Conventions.

Interpretation from Arabic: Observer, International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) – Our Confederation wishes to underline the importance of the Iraqi Government taking full account of the recommendations made by the Committee of Experts, especially with reference to the Convention. We can confirm that what the Government has said is true. The Government is indeed drafting new legislation on trade union organizations in the country.

In 2018, Ministerial Decree No. 18 was adopted, which launched the process. But we think it now needs to go faster, because we see that today there are still trade unionists being excluded from participation in negotiations that they should be involved in because they are seen as not representing workers in the public sector in particular. And this is an issue in various industries, including the electricity industry, the oil industry, the civil service, as well as other areas. So, what is happening right now is that it is still not possible to have trade unions in those sectors; it is not possible to have collective bargaining, which is creating serious problems in the country.

We have also seen that many trade unionists have been subject to sanctions. We therefore call upon the Government to repeal Law No. 52/1987 on trade union organizations and also to repeal Decision No. 150/1987 on the matter. We recommend that all legislation that runs counter to the spirit of this Convention should be repealed.

We also recognize that Iraq urgently needs technical assistance from the ILO for trade union capacity-building to promote the application of the Conventions on freedom of association. We need to improve the structure of our Ministry of Labour to allow it to play its rightful role and to allow its staff to play their rightful part in taking the country forward and promoting collective bargaining.

Observer, International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) – For over a decade, the Committee of Experts has been calling on the Government to remove obstacles to trade union pluralism, which hamper trade union multiplicity and consequently the enjoyment by all workers of the rights protected by the Convention.

While we welcome the Government’s indication that Government Decision No. 8750 of 2005 has been repealed, we are deeply concerned that Law No. 52 of 1987 is still in force. This Law effectively establishes a de facto trade union monopoly forbidding the establishment of other unions and federations. While multiple unions operate in the country despite Law No. 52, the effect of the Law is such that the Government favours the official governmental federation, thus marginalizing and excluding from social dialogue initiatives by other workers’ organizations. Therefore, the Government continues to exert undue interference in the establishment and activities of independent trade unions, while effectively restricting the right of these organizations to bargain collectively on behalf of their members. These are serious violations of the Convention.

The Government of Iraq has an obligation to encourage and promote free and voluntary collective bargaining under Article 4 of the Convention. There is no conceivable way for this to be done where a trade union monopoly that is not based on any valid representativity criteria continues to operate.

Further, it is clear that any favourable or unfavourable treatment by the public authorities of a particular trade union as compared with others, if it is not based on objective criteria, constitutes an act of discrimination and interference in violation of the Convention.

We therefore call on the Government to repeal Law No. 52 and to promote and encourage free and voluntary collective bargaining in practice so as to ensure full compliance with the guarantees set out in the Convention.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government representative – I would like to thank all those who participated in the discussion for their interventions.

The representative of the General Federation of Iraqi Trade Unions made his statement. He criticized the Government’s measures and this is an indication that there is freedom, that there are no restrictions on what is being said. But we, on our part, can refute any allegation that free trade unions cannot operate freely, of course within the law, which is what is happening in the rest of the world.

In Iraq, at the Ministry of Labour, we have set up a committee and this committee is chaired by myself, and I continue to work with the Director of and other officials from the International Labour Standards Department on the law, and Mr Ali Rahim, who is the head of the General Federation of Iraqi Trade Unions, of which Mr Adnan Safar is a member, and who is also a member of the committee which has been set up. The fact that this committee is made up of other trade union organizations by virtue of an order issued by the Council of Ministers and their participation in drafting the new draft law on trade union organization testifies to the non-existence of discrimination and clear recognition of all trade union organizations.

The Government is not party to any trade union conflict. It seeks an optimum application of Iraq’s Constitution and of the ILO’s Conventions. However, we have encountered special circumstances, such as the fight against terrorism and several political crises, which may have been an obstacle in expediting the promulgation of the law. We, the Government, believe in the right to organize, in pluralism and in non-interference in the work of trade union organizations.

With respect to the right of employees to join trade union organizations, the new draft law grants the right of employees to establish their trade union organizations inside ministries. We have an independent judiciary. In Iraq, we do not have a single prisoner of opinion because the Constitution guarantees the right to freedom of expression and the right to demonstrate. There may be separate incidents of one officer or soldier, but this does not reflect the general policy of the State nor its procedures. We are continuing to work, and we are continuing to dialogue with the social partners. We are also continuing to work with the Office, the Beirut Office and the Baghdad Office. Recently, a workshop was held on the new draft law, attended by the Director of the Baghdad Office, Ms Maha Qataa, and most trade union organizations, including Mr Adnan Safar.

We would like to avail ourselves of ILO technical assistance so as to prepare a new draft law which is in conformity with our Constitution, which is based on freedom, pluralism and the provisions contained in Conventions Nos 87 and 98. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the Office, the Director and other officials from the International Labour Standards Department.

Employer members – We have listened to all the comments that have been made by all the participants this afternoon and I think it is fair to say we have expressed things in different ways, but we are broadly consistent in the views that have been expressed.

One thing worth observing is that Iraq is not unique in the sense that it is one of a number of countries in our memories, in our lifetimes, that have emerged from regimes which were far less democratic than what is in place now. And what they have all experienced, and Iraq has certainly experienced it, is that it is not easy to emerge from that sort of background to come to full forms of democracy. That does not happen in five minutes and the processes and expressions of democracy have to be understood before you can even give effect to them. So we do understand that it has not been easy.

We also understand that the Government of Iraq is committed to upholding the principles of the Convention, that it has recognized that it is not an expert in those things in its own right, and that it has asked for the assistance of the ILO, among others, to do that. That is what a number of countries before Iraq have not done and they have taken longer, so we are seeing a situation where I think we need to say to Iraq: do what you say you are going to do; we accept and you accept that there are gaps in where you need to be to be fully compliant with the Convention, and insofar as the ILO and anybody else is available and willing to give assistance, take that assistance. I think you have asked for it, I think you should receive it and I think you are going in the right direction and, as I said in my earlier remarks, if you are doing these things, it may be that next time we meet we will actually hear of progress.

Worker members – I would like to thank the delegates who participated in our discussion.

The Government of Iraq made reference to a number of issues which do not fall within the scope of the examination of this discussion; in particular, aspects relating to internal affairs of the unions.

The Worker members insist that the Government must ensure the right to collective bargaining for all workers. We call on the Government to: first, repeal section 10 of the Revolutionary Council Resolution No. 115 of 1987. Second, repeal section 2 of Law No. 52 of 1987: as a reminder, these two texts prohibit the establishment of trade union organizations in the public sector. Third, repeal the instructions and ministerial circulars that have the same effect. They must be replaced by provisions that unequivocally guarantee the right to freedom of association and collective bargaining in this sector. Fourth, repeal section 21 of Law No. 52 of 1987 on trade union organizations which provides that the General Federation of Trade Unions is the supreme body for trade union organizations. We call on the Government to adopt legal provisions that ensure trade union pluralism at all levels and guarantee the right to collective bargaining. Fifth, establish a mechanism to effectively and dissuasively combat acts of anti-union discrimination, such as dismissals. And, sixth, stop intimidation of trade union activists by ensuring a climate free of violence against them.

In order to give effect to these elements, we ask the Government to accept a direct contacts mission.

Conclusions of the Committee

The Committee took note of the oral and written statements made by the Government and the discussion that followed.

The Committee noted with concern that there are significant compliance issues regarding the Convention in law and practice with respect to the protection against anti-union discrimination, the scope of collective bargaining permitted under the law, the lack of trade union pluralism, and interference in free and voluntary collective bargaining.

Taking into account the discussion, the Committee urges the Government, in consultation with the social partners, to:

- provide information on measures taken or envisaged to encourage and promote voluntary collective bargaining, the number of collective agreements concluded and in force in the country, as well as the sectors concerned and the number of workers covered by these agreements;

- prohibit acts of undue interference in the establishment, functioning and administration of trade unions and make provision for appeal procedures, coupled with effective and dissuasive sanctions;

- undertake legal and practical measures to ensure protection against anti-union discrimination, including through effective and expeditious access to courts, adequate compensation and the imposition of sufficiently dissuasive sanctions; and

- take all appropriate legal and practical measures to ensure that trade union rights can be exercised in normal conditions with respect for basic human rights and in a climate free of violence, pressure, fear and threats of any kind.

The Committee invites the Government to accept an ILO direct contacts mission.

The Committee requests the Government to submit a report to the Committee of Experts by 1 September 2022 with information on the application of the Convention in law and practice, in consultation with the social partners.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2008, Publication: 97th ILC session (2008)

A Government representative indicated that his intervention would focus on three topics. The observations made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in 2006 on violations of trade union and collective bargaining rights; on serious cases of violence and other violations of freedom of association; and on the views of the Committee of Experts on the new draft Labour Code which had not yet been adopted.

For three decades, Iraq had suffered from oppressive conditions, wars, economic sanctions and isolation from the rest of the world. It was currently undergoing exceptional circumstances, outside its national will and desire, which had led to severe losses at all levels especially by the workers and trade union organizations, as well as other segments of the population. He recalled in that context the loss of one member of the Iraqi delegation who was supposed to be attending the ILO Conference, a victim of such turbulent times.

He referred to Act No. 52 of 1987 on trade union organizations which established the monopoly of the Confederation of Iraqi Workers' Unions, excluded any other union or federation, and deprived the public sector and the government departments from the application of Conventions Nos 87 and 98, with regard to trade union freedoms. That Act was only in force in form. As of April 2003, the situation had changed as the workers had set up several unions and federations, with different policies, programmes and affiliations. At the present time, such unions, including unions in the southern oil fields, exercised their inherent rights to full freedom in spite of the lack of a legal framework.

He pointed out that the crisis between the trade union and the Ministry of Oil was not a trade union crisis, nor a labour relations crisis. It concerned a serious threat to Iraq's oil wealth, which represented 95 per cent of the total GDP, the source of income of 28 million Iraqi citizens, adding that the wealth was exposed to piracy, theft and impediments to the exportation of Iraqi oil by armed political and professional groups. It was in that context that the Ministry of Oil had taken strict measures to protect oil, and Iraqi society from poverty and famine.

Referring to the Ministry's letter No. 1487 dated 20 September 2007, addressed to the Secretary-General of the ITUC, he highlighted the importance of oil, which was the bread of every Iraqi citizen. He emphasized that the Ministry of Labour appreciated any peaceful means used to obtain the rights of workers and trade unionists but was against any damage to the national interest, just like the trade union movement itself, known for its sacrifices and long struggle in safeguarding Iraq's wealth.

International terrorism and the repercussions of occupation in the last five years, causing the death of many innocent lives was the second subject he mentioned, indicating that terrorism was merciless as it did not distinguish between a trade unionist, an employer, a university lecturer or a child.

The third issue related to the views of the Committee of Experts on the draft Labour Code which had not yet been adopted. He pointed out that the draft Labour Code was the fruit of social dialogue, approved by the Government and the social partners as it met the ambitions of the tripartite partners. He stressed that the draft Labour Code was commended by the report of the Committee of Experts because the Iraqi Ministry of Labour had reviewed it in light of model labour acts in the Arab region, and with a view to ensuring conformity with international labour standards.

He then cited several sections of the draft Labour Code such as sections 39, 41(a) and 139(a) which provided for the right of a worker to lodge an appeal against his/her dismissal before a committee or a labour court within a period of 30 days; the obligation of an employer to give notice to a worker, on ending a contract, or pay compensation within a delay of 30 days; and the dissolution of a trade union by virtue of a decision rendered by its governing board in accordance with the provisions of the trade union statute, and a judicial decision in the case of a trade union which no longer fulfilled the aims for which it had been set up.

The Government sought indeed to invalidate Act No. 150 of 1987, as there were extensive safeguards for work- ers and trade union organizations in the case of privatization or that of an employer's insolvency.

The speaker requested the review by the Committee of Experts of section 6 of the draft Labour Code, as civil servants had special regulations governing their recruitment, promotion, monthly wages and old-age pensions. There was no discrimination at work nor were they deprived of the provisions of the Convention.

With respect to the Committee of Experts' request on employees in the public service and old-age pensioners, he requested the Committee to review section 3(2) of the draft Code which did not apply to employees covered by the provisions of the Civil Service Act and the Consolidated Civil Retirement Act, members of the armed forces and members of an employer's household.

Section 5 of the draft Labour Code established trade union freedoms and freedom of association (Convention No. 87); the right to organize and to collective bargaining (Convention No. 98); the elimination of all forms of forced labour and child labour; the elimination of discrimination in employment and occupation, ensuring equal pay and social dialogue. The above section was a concrete example of the respect by Iraq for the fundamental principles and rights at work and an invitation to implement decent work.

The Worker members provided explanations as to the reasons why they had decided to add Iraq to the list of individual cases. Certainly, the situation of civil war and extremely difficult political circumstances in the country hindered the Government's work. Nevertheless, considerations of social justice argued in favour of the discussion of this case. Indeed, the population remained the first victim of the situation in Iraq and trade unionists faced many dangers, like the workers in the oil sector, in education and in the civil service, all of whom were considered targets for armed and terrorist groups. Hence, the discussion of this case by the Committee fell perfectly within the mandate of the ILO, which offered guidance and tools to reinstate social justice after crisis situations. The objective was to help the Iraqi Government to rebuild a real social dialogue, through collective bargaining that was close to reality and the specific needs of the population, and thus contributed to restoring employment, social security and the dignity of workers. Moreover, the Government had already accepted technical assistance from the Office for the preparation of the new Labour Code. However, problems remained in the application of the Convention, notably its Articles 1, 3, 4 and 6.

Concerning anti-trade union discrimination, section 41 of the draft Labour Code certainly offered some protection, but one article alone was not enough. It was imperative to anticipate the manner in which the complainant would obtain the proof of the discrimination they were subjected to, give them enough time to gather exhibits of their cases and, generally, guarantee them easy and free access to impartial justice. Furthermore, the provisions concerning the trade union founders and presidents did not provide for their protection against acts of discrimination throughout the entirety of their employment relationship. These provisions did not protect members of trade unions and former trade union leaders either.

The draft Labour Code apparently positively settled the issue of the representation of trade union members for any question concerning their collective interests, as well as the issue of the different levels of collective bargaining. However, the draft provision which stated that a trade union must gather the support of 50 per cent of the members of a bargaining unit to be recognized as official spokesperson was too restrictive. Finally, the question of the protection of civil servants and employees of the public sector who were not appointed to the administration of the State should still be examined, since the draft Code excluded "civil servants and those retired from the civil service" from its application.

The Government had certainly made efforts, but those efforts remained insufficient to ensure the full application of the Convention and an effective fight against anti-trade union discrimination. The Government should, without delay, take measures to find a solution to the problems that were very accurately identified by the Committee of Experts.

The Employer members recognized the Government's role with regard to collective bargaining as well as the climate of violence prevailing in the country, which affected most people, particularly workers and employers. However, by ratifying ILO Conventions, such as Convention No. 98, a building block in Iraq's future would be put in place. The ILO had provided assistance in drafting the Labour Code but there were still areas that required improvement. Collective bargaining in the civil service needed to be aligned with the Convention, especially regarding legislation on anti-union discrimination. But the Employers' group did not agree that all trade unions should be enabled to bargain collectively as this could lead to a proliferation of trade unions across the country and an untenable situation.

all the leading actors to the table. Both the Employers and Workers had offered their assistance and this was an opportunity to be seized. Finally, they urged the Government to make use of the technical assistance that the ILO could offer.

The Worker member of Iraq referred to the suffering of Iraqi workers and trade union organizations due to Government laws and decisions which were contrary to the right to organize and other trade union rights set out in the ILO instruments, as well as the continued violations by the occupying forces and the risks confronted by Iraqi citizens in general, and by Iraqi trade unionists in particular, in the context of five years of terrorism.

After 2003, which saw the occupation of Iraq, the efforts of the workers of Iraq to set up independent and strong trade unions had resulted in the establishment of many trade union federations. Based on the workers' belief in pluralism and democracy, such federations functioned independently for more than two years, until the three largest trade union federations were united, on 20 September 2005, in the General Federation of Iraqi Workers. The latter continued to unify the voice of Iraqi workers and sought to protect Iraqi workers from the prevailing tragic conditions such as unemployment, child labour, and bad health conditions. He stressed that his federation continued to be committed to the trade union movement, free from discrimination and government intervention.

Unfortunately, unjust legislation and regulations imposed by the previous regime on workers continued to be in force, despite the changes which had occurred in the last five years. The two Acts on Labour and Social Security of 1987 and on Trade Union Organization, No. 52 of 1987, were still in force and the new Labour Code had not yet been adopted, in spite of the efforts made for its formulation by his federation and the Ministry of Labour, through joint committees. The notorious Act No. 150 of 1987 was still in force, depriving public servants of the right to organize.

After April 2003, and the election of the Iraqi Government, his federation had initially been optimistic that the unjust laws would be changed through the voice of its workers and social partners. He expressed his surprise at the unjust Decision No. 8750 of 2005, taken by the Council of Ministers, by virtue of which the latter had seized the funds and property of all trade unions - an unprecedented move. After this, all trade union work ceased to be effective, although the federation continued its work. In April 2007, US forces had raided the premises of the General Federation of Iraqi Workers, destroyed furniture, and some property, besides seizing computers and other equipment, without any reason. He recalled that terrorism and its impact on trade union organization should not be forgotten as it had led to the assassination of trade union leaders.

In conclusion, the speaker declared his federation's opposition to the privatization of the wealth generated by Iraq's oil and the important service sectors, and called for the solidarity and assistance of the international community, to Iraqi workers and trade union organizations, so as to overcome such dire circumstances.

The Worker member of the United Kingdom, whose statement the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), the Global Union Federations of the International Federation of Chemical, Energy, Mine and General Workers' Union (ICEM), Public Services International (PSI) and Education International (EI) associated themselves, declared that Iraq's future depended on strong, free and independent trade unions. However, the occupation forces continued to raid their offices and confiscate their property, insurgents killed their leaders, and the Government continued to maintain restrictive laws on trade union activities, interfere in their internal affairs and finances and harass their leaders.

He addressed five concerns. First, the 1987 Act No. 150 banned public sector (80 per cent of the Iraqi workforce including the oil sector) trade unions. Second, Decision No. 8750 empowered the Government to take over trade unions at will and had been used to freeze their bank accounts. This Decree should be abolished. Third, the ILO- compliant labour law, under review for several years, had still not been adopted as promised. Fourth, the Government had still not released frozen funds for internal elections in the General Federation of Iraqi Workers (GFIW) and insisted that candidates must be Iraqi citizens and, in flagrant violation of the Convention, that they must have the support of their employer. Fifth, the Government also insisted that only unions in the private sector would be involved, which would forcibly restructure unions with both private and public sector worker members, and prevent the vast majority of GFIW members from having any say in their organization's leadership.

He reported that eight leaders of the ICEM-affiliated Iraqi Federation of Oil Unions were to be moved from their jobs and homes in the southern oil fields to a violent part of Baghdad, thus disrupting the activities of the union and deliberately putting them in danger. He noted that these complaints did not apply to Iraqi Kurdistan.

He called on the Government to explain the contradictions between its words and deeds, noting that the independent trade unions united workers across social boundaries and supported women's emancipation. He also called on the Government to halt anti-union repression and introduce a labour law promoting social dialogue, freedom of association and collective bargaining. He asked the Government to act without delay to bring law and practice into compliance with the Convention, and to move rapidly to ratify Convention No. 87.

The Employer member of Iraq stated that the Government's Decision No. 8750 of 8 August 2005, confiscating the funds of the social partners was not justified, and was considered unconstitutional because it intervened in the affairs of organizations in an undemocratic manner and was not in conformity with international labour standards.

That decision had a negative impact on the capacity of employers' organizations to provide services to their members and to participate in many internal and external meetings and weakened their capacity to participate in the formulation of policies and capacity-building programmes.

He indicated his full understanding of the preoccupations besetting the Government and its efforts to address terrorism and cases of violence afflicting the country and its people after the occupation, and of the great challenges emerging in the social and economic fields.

Such preoccupations could be a reason behind the adoption of the above decision, or behind the delay in taking decisive action on outstanding issues. He emphasized the employers' engagement in pursuing continued dialogue with the Government, represented by the Ministry of Labour, and the Minister, so as to annul the above decision, pointing out that there were many active players in the Government who were in favour of the annulment.

He expressed his hope that the national Government would annul the above decision as a gesture of good will towards the private sector and its representatives so as to enable it to participate effectively in the country's reconstruction, development and in the creation of jobs and reduce unemployment for the sake of social peace.

He concluded by requesting the ILO and its Regional Office in Beirut to help the social partners in building their capacity and in promoting social dialogue, so as to annul the above decision and help in meeting the current challenges and pressures with which the country was confronted at such a critical phase in its history.

The Government representative of Iraq welcomed the views expressed by the Employer members and expressed appreciation of their understanding of the complex situation in Iraq. He reaffirmed his Government's commitment to giving effect to the provisions of Convention No. 98, ratified by Iraq in 1962. He expressed gratitude to the Worker members for their support for Iraq's workers and their trade union movement and said that their technical comments on the new draft Labour Code would be taken into account. He noted that the events referred to during the discussion reflected the general situation in the country that affected society as a whole. He also welcomed the views expressed by the Worker member of Iraq, which coincided with those of the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs. He added that the Ministry was seeking through all means to remove all obstacles encountered by the social partners.

He informed the Conference Committee of the correspondence between the Ministry of Labour and higher official bodies on the annulment of unjust Act No. 150 of 1987 and Diwani Decision No. 8750, dated 8 August 2005. The trade union movement in Iraq had established a preparatory and objective professional committee to supervise elections, in accordance with the established regulations, and progress was being made in preparing the mechanism needed for elections so as to ensure democracy.

He added that the vision described by the Employer members was fully in keeping with the expectations of the Ministry of Labour and expressed appreciation to the Employer members for their comments on cooperation between the Ministry and the social partners. He called on the ILO and its Regional Office in Beirut to make further efforts to strengthen the capacities of employers' and workers' organizations through the provision of material and technical cooperation. He reiterated his commitment to trade union rights and collective bargaining and emphasized the importance of social dialogue as an effective means of ensuring democracy and achieving progress. His Government was determined to achieve these objectives with a view to overcoming present realities and ensuring the prosperity of Iraqi employers and workers.

The Worker members said that the discussion illustrated the efforts made by the Government of Iraq to meet the objectives of Convention No. 98. Those efforts were, however, still insufficient. A reading of the draft Labour Code showed that at present acts of anti-union discrimination were not being effectively addressed and effectively eliminated. The comments made by the Committee of Experts were very precise and well argued. It was therefore for the Government to take measures without delay to guarantee genuine freedom of association, in particular by repealing the legislation which was in violation of these principles.

In 2007, the ILO had offered technical assistance for the preparation of the draft Labour Code, which had not sufficed. It was however difficult to criticize the Government, as it was confronted with a situation that it was not in a position to completely control.

The Worker members proposed that another ILO technical assistance mission should be undertaken, so as to allow the Government to respond adequately to the requests made by the Committee of Experts and to integrate the proposed solutions into national legislation.

Finally, the Worker members recognized the positive attitude demonstrated by the Government, which was not suspected of a lack of good will. However, the situation would be different if in a future survey carried out by the ITUC or in supervision by a body responsible for the application of standards it were to be found that such confidence had been misplaced.

The Employer members noted with concern some of the allegations made by the Worker members. However, they emphasized that the Government should note the consensus among the Employer and Worker members that the old decrees needed to be repealed and a new labour code introduced which took into account the comments made by the Committee of Experts. They reiterated that the establishment of a solid foundation would help to alleviate the current unacceptable climate. These included not only new legislation, but also a strengthening of social dialogue. The ILO could play an important role in this regard and the Employer members endorsed the proposal made by the Worker members for the further involvement of the Office.

Conclusions

The Committee noted the information provided by the Government representative and the debate that followed.

The Committee observed that the comments of the Com mittee of Experts concerned serious allegations of anti-union violence, the absence of sufficient legislative measures for the application of the Convention and the issuance of directives in the oil sector contrary to the guarantees provided by the Convention.

The Committee took due note of the Government's statement regarding the ongoing process of reconstruction and the climate of violence in the country. It further noted that the draft Labour Code, prepared with the assistance of the ILO, was presently before the Shura Council, as well as the Government's statement that it would take the comments of the Committee of Experts on board before proceeding with its adoption. The Government added that, despite the current absence of an appropriate legislative framework governing the right to organize, trade unions were able to carry out their activities without interference. The Committee further noted the Government's statement relating to the labour dispute in the oil sector.

The Committee also took note of the statement made by the Iraqi Worker's delegate as to the difficulties faced in organizing workers and the interference workers' organizations encountered in their activities, including the freezing of trade union assets. The Committee observed similar concerns raised by the Iraqi employers' organizations.

Observing that a draft Labour Code was prepared some time ago with the assistance of the ILO, the Committee expressed the firm hope that the draft Code would be modified along the lines requested by the Committee of Experts, in full consultation with the social partners, and would be adopted without delay. In the meantime, the Committee called upon the Government to ensure that the laws and practice of the previous regime were no longer applied. The Committee considered that the application of this Convention and vigorous efforts towards extensive and meaningful social dialogue were important building blocks to the process of reconstruction ongoing in the country. It hoped that it would be in a position in the near future to observe that all workers, including public servants not engaged in the ad- ministration of the State, could fully enjoy the effective protection of the provisions of the Convention.

Welcoming the Government's request for ILO technical assistance, the Committee urged it to accept an ILO technical assistance mission in the near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Committee notes the comments made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication dated 26 August 2009, which primarily refer to matters previously raised by the Committee.

Violence against trade unionists. Previously the Committee, noting the ITUC’s 2008 comments on the persistence of serious violations of freedom of association, had requested the Government to provide information on the ITUC’s allegations of arrests, detentions and acts of violence committed against trade unionists. The Committee takes note of the Government’s statement that it has never sanctioned or committed arrests and acts of violence against trade unionists, and that it was cooperating with the representatives of trade unions in order to submit detailed information respecting this matter. Further noting that in its most recent comments the ITUC refers to further acts of violence, the Committee once again expresses the hope that it will be possible in the near future for trade union rights and the right to collective bargaining to be exercised normally and in observance of fundamental rights, and in a climate free from violence, duress, fear and any kind of threat. It requests the Government to provide information with respect to the ITUC’s allegations concerning these serious matters.

Articles 1, 3 and 4 of the Convention. The Committee had previously noted that, according to the Government, a draft Labour Code had been referred to the Consultative Council (Majlis Al-Shura) so that Parliament could examine and adopt the said legislation. It further noted that the guarantees laid down in the draft Labour Code for protection against acts of anti-union discrimination applied to trade union founders and chairpersons and to trade union officers but not to trade union members; nor did the draft establish adequate guarantees against discrimination at the time of recruitment. The Committee also noted that, although it covered anti-union dismissals, the draft did not address other adverse measures affecting trade union membership or activities.

The Committee had pointed out that protection against acts of anti-union discrimination must apply to trade union members as well as union officers, and must cover not only dismissal but any other measure amounting to anti-union discrimination (transfer, demotion and other measures that have adverse effects). Furthermore, the protection provided for by the Convention applied upon recruitment, in the course of employment and at the time of separation. The Committee also recalled that general provisions of the law prohibiting acts of anti-union discrimination are not enough if they are not accompanied by effective and rapid procedures to ensure their application in practice; protection against acts of anti-union discrimination should therefore be ensured by various means adapted to national law and practice that prevent or effectively redress such acts, in particular through sufficiently dissuasive sanctions. The Committee had accordingly requested the Government to take the necessary steps to amend the draft Labour Code so as to ensure adequate protection for members of trade unions and trade union officers against acts of anti-union discrimination, in accordance with the principles noted above.

Previously the Committee had noted that section 142 of the draft Labour Code establishes a duty to bargain in good faith when a request to open collective negotiations has been submitted by a registered union representing no less than 50 per cent of the workers employed at the establishment or enterprise, or where such a request has been submitted jointly by several registered unions representing no less than 50 per cent of the workers to whom the collective agreement is to apply. The Committee pointed out that problems may arise where it is established by law that a trade union must receive the support of 50 per cent of the members of a bargaining unit to be recognized as a bargaining agent: a union that fails to secure this absolute majority is thus denied the possibility of bargaining. It noted that if no union – or group of unions, as provided for in section 142 – covers more than 50 per cent of the workers, collective bargaining rights should not be denied to the unions in the unit concerned, at least on behalf of their own members, and had requested the Government to take the necessary steps to amend section 142 of the draft Labour Code accordingly.

In respect of the matters noted above, the Committee notes with interest the Government’s statement that its comments concerning adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination are addressed in the draft Labour Code’s chapter concerning trade union organizations, that section 142 of the draft Code has been amended to bring it into conformity with the Convention, and that a new section 143 has been included to address the Committee’s comments on minimum membership requirements for the acquisition of bargaining agent status.

Article 4. Promotion of collective bargaining. The Committee had previously referred to the absence, in Act No. 52 of 1987 on trade union organizations, of any provisions to promote collective bargaining and thus give effect to Article 4 of the Convention. The Government indicates in this regard that the draft Labour Code repeals Act No. 52 of 1987 on trade union organizations. The Government further states that section 147 of the draft Labour Code defines a collective labour contract as an agreement between the trade union, on behalf of the workers of the occupations and industries it represents, and the employers concerned. Additionally, such a contract has to be established within one occupation, one industry or one project or for similar, interlinked or common projects in order to regulate reciprocal legal and contractual obligations between the parties concerned. Noting this information, the Committee requests the Government to confirm whether, under the draft Labour Code, collective bargaining at the enterprise level is also recognized. The Committee further invites the Government to take appropriate measures to promote collective bargaining, through publications, seminars and other activities designed to increase awareness of its utility.

Articles 1, 4 and 6. The Committee had been noting for many years that Act No. 150 of 1987 on public servants, which the Government was planning to repeal, contains no provisions affording the guarantees established in the Convention to public servants and public sector employees engaged in the administration of the State, and had further observed that the draft Labour Code excludes employees of the public service from its scope. The Committee had previously noted that the Government, in consultation with the social partners and experts from the Office, was drafting a recommendation with a view to including in the new Labour Code provisions on the trade union rights of public sector workers, which would give them the rights provided for in Articles 1, 3 and 6 of the Convention. In this regard, the Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that the draft Labour Code repeals Act No. 150 of 1987 on public servants, so that public servants will be covered by its provisions. The Committee expresses the hope that public servants will enjoy all the rights and guarantees enshrined in the Convention and requests the Government to indicate in its next report the progress made with respect to the draft Labour Code’s adoption.

Trade union monopoly and interference in trade union activities. The Committee had noted that, according to a statement made by the Government representative to the 2008 Conference Committee on the Application of Standards, Act No. 52 of 1987 established a de facto monopoly of the Confederation of Iraqi Workers’ Unions by forbidding the establishment of other unions or federations. The Government representative also indicated that the Act was in force only on paper, in that since April 2003 other unions have been set up in several sectors notwithstanding the lack of a proper legal framework. The Committee noted that the Conference Committee’s discussions also addressed the need to repeal Decision No. 8750 of 8 August 2005, the provisions of which had been used by the Government to freeze the trade union’s bank assets. It considered that texts which have not yet been formally repealed, such as Decision No. 8750, can generate uncertainty in law and hinder the development of collective bargaining within the meaning of the Convention and of other trade union activities. The Committee trusted that the Government would shortly indicate that Act No. 52 of 1987 and Decision No. 8750 of 2005 had been formally repealed. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the draft Labour Code repeals Act No. 52 of 1987, and that the repeal of Decision No. 8750 will be considered once workers’ elections have been held and the financial liability for keeping the assets of the Confederation defined. In these circumstances, the Committee expresses the hope that the Government will shortly indicate the repeal of Decision No. 8750 of 2005, so as to ensure trade union multiplicity, and requests the Government to indicate in its next report any developments in this regard.

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

In its previous observation, the Committee took note of comments sent in 2006 and 2007 by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) reporting serious instances of violence and breach of freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining, including instances of anti-union violence and a directive prohibiting companies in the oil sector from cooperating with members of trade unions. In its reply, the Government reiterates that acts of terrorism are indiscriminate in terms of the population they affect, which includes trade union officers. It nonetheless adds that security in the country has improved, that criminal activities are on the decline and that the Government’s plan to establish the rule of law will help to create a more favourable climate for the trade union movement. As for the dispute in the oil sector, the Government states that an amicable settlement was reached following the signing of an agreement by the Ministry of Petroleum and the petroleum unions in Basra. The Committee takes notes of this information and expresses the hope that it will be possible in the near future for trade union rights and the right to collective bargaining to be exercised normally and in observance of fundamental rights, and in a climate free from violence, duress, fear and any kind of threat.

The Committee notes the communication of 29 August 2008 from the ITUC raising a number of legislative issues on which the Committee has already commented and drawing attention to the persistence of the serious violations of freedom of association. The Committee notes the Government’s reply of 18 November 2008 and asks it to comment on the ITUC’s comments concerning arrests, detentions and acts of violence against trade unionists.

The Committee also takes note of the discussions that took place in the Committee on the Application of Standards at the 97th Session of the International Labour Conference (June 2008), on Iraq’s application of the Convention. It notes that the matters discussed included the need to amend certain provisions of the draft Labour Code of 2007 in order to align them more closely with the requirements of the Convention. The Committee notes that in its conclusions, the Conference Committee expressed the firm hope that the draft Code would be amended along the lines requested by the Committee, in full consultation with the social partners, and that it would be adopted without delay. The Conference Committee also called upon the Government to ensure that the laws and practice of the previous regime were no longer applied and expressed the hope that all workers, including public servants not engaged in the administration of the State, would be able fully to enjoy effective protection in accordance with the provisions of the Convention.

The Committee notes that in its report the Government states that the draft Labour Code has been referred to the Consultative Council (Majlis Al-Shura) so that Parliament can examine and adopt it. It also notes the information that the Tripartite Consultation Committee has recommended that a Ministry of Labour representative who took part in that Committee’s discussion should relay its observations to the Consultative Council with a view to determining how they should be implemented to take account of the demands of the national interest. The Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary steps to ensure that the draft Labour Code is fully in keeping with the requirements of the Convention and that it will take due account to that end of all the following points, which the Committee raised in its previous observation.

Articles 1 and 3 of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the guarantees laid down in the draft Labour Code for protection against acts of anti-union discrimination apply to trade union founders and chairpersons and to trade union officers but not to trade union members. Furthermore, the draft does not establish adequate guarantees against discrimination at the time of recruitment. The Committee also noted that although it covers anti-union dismissals, the draft does not address other adverse measures affecting trade union membership or activities. It pointed out that protection against acts of anti-union discrimination must apply to trade union members as well as union officers, and must cover not only dismissal but any other measure amounting to anti-union discrimination (transfer, demotion and other measures that have adverse effects). Furthermore, the protection provided for by the Convention applies upon recruitment, in the course of employment and at the time of separation. Lastly, the general provisions of the law prohibiting acts of anti-union discrimination are not enough if they are not accompanied by effective and rapid procedures to ensure their application in practice. Protection against acts of anti-union discrimination should therefore be ensured by various means adapted to national law and practice that prevent or effectively redress such acts. The Committee requests the Government to take due account of the principles recalled above and to take the necessary steps to amend the draft Labour Code so as to ensure adequate protection for members of trade unions and trade union officers against acts of anti-union discrimination.

Article 4. In its previous comments the Committee noted that section 142 of the draft Labour Code establishes a duty to bargain in good faith when a request to open collective negotiations has been submitted by a registered union representing no less than 50 per cent of the workers employed at the establishment or enterprise, or where such a request has been submitted jointly by several registered unions representing no less than 50 per cent of the workers to whom the collective agreement is to apply. The Committee pointed out that problems may arise where it is established by law that a trade union must receive the support of 50 per cent of the members of a bargaining unit to be recognized as a bargaining agent: a union that fails to secure this absolute majority is thus denied the possibility of bargaining. It noted that if no union – or group of unions, as provided for in section 142 – covers more than 50 per cent of the workers, collective bargaining rights should not be denied to the unions in the unit concerned, at least on behalf of their own members. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary steps to amend section 142 of the draft Labour Code accordingly.

The Committee trusts that in its next report, the Government will indicate the progress made in revising the draft Labour Code to bring it fully in to line with the Convention. It hopes that the technical assistance provided by the Office in preparing the draft will be pursued in respect of these matters.

Articles 1, 4 and 6. The Committee has been noting for many years that Act No. 150 of 1987 on public servants which the Government is planning to repeal contains no provisions affording the guarantees established in the Convention (protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference and the right to collective bargaining of employment conditions) to public servants and public sector employees who are not engaged in the administration of the State. The Committee notes that in its report, the Government merely states that public sector employees are not subject to the provisions of Act No. 52 of 1987 on trade unions. The Committee observes that the draft Labour Code excludes employees of the public service from its scope. The Government indicated previously – although it provided no legal text – that public servants do have such protection pursuant to the laws and regulations applying to the enterprises and institutions that employ them.

The Committee recalls that Article 6 of the Convention provides that only public servants engaged in the administration of the State may be excluded from the Convention’s scope; all other persons employed by the Government, public enterprises or autonomous public institutions should benefit from the guarantees afforded by the Convention. The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report that, in consultation with the social partners and experts from the Office, a recommendation was drawn up with a view to including in the new Labour Code provisions on the trade union rights of public sector workers, which will give them the rights provided for in Articles 1, 3 and 6 of the Convention. The Committee notes this information and asks the Government to provide information in its next report on all progress made in this respect.

Article 4. Promotion of collective bargaining. The Committee has been commenting for many years on the fact that Act No. 52 of 1987 on trade union organizations contains no provisions to give effect to Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the draft Labour Code will contain provisions to promote collective bargaining.

Trade union monopoly and interference in trade union activities. The Committee notes that according to a statement made by the Government representative to the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards, Act No. 52 of 1987 established a de facto monopoly of the Confederation of Iraqi Workers’ Unions by forbidding the establishment of other unions or federations. However, according to the Government representative, the Act was in force only on paper, in that since April 2003 other unions have been set up in several sectors notwithstanding the lack of a proper legal framework. The Committee notes that the Conference Committee’s discussions also addressed the need to repeal Decision No. 8750 of 8 August 2005, the provisions of which have been used by the Government to freeze the trade unions’ bank assets.

In the Committee’s view, texts such as these which have not yet been formally repealed can generate uncertainty in law and hinder the development of collective bargaining within the meaning of the Convention and of other trade union activities. The Committee trusts that the Government will shortly indicate that Act No. 52 of 1987 and Decision No. 8750 of 2005 have been formally repealed.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report and the draft Labour Code of 2007. The Committee notes with interest that this draft legislation, which was drafted with the technical assistance of the ILO, applies to a significant extent the provisions of the Convention. It further notes the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), which refer to serious violations of freedom of association and collective bargaining in practice, including instances of anti-union violence and the issuance of a directive prohibiting companies in the oil sector from cooperating with members of trade unions. The Committee requests the Government to submit its observations thereon.

Previously, the Committee had taken note of the allegations made by the ITUC in 2006 concerning serious cases of violence and other violations of freedom of association. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that it has not set any conditions impeding the setting up of trade unions in Iraq, but rather recognizes all trade union formations without distinction and strives to ensure their independence. The Government further states that certain trade union leaders had fallen victim to terrorist operations and that, although a climate of violence remained the general situation in all sectors of activity, it remained committed to eliminating this serious problem. The Committee, aware of the ongoing process of reconstruction and the climate of violence in the country, takes due note of the above information.

Articles 1 and 3 of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to include in the legislation provisions guaranteeing adequate protection for workers against any acts of anti-union discrimination. In this regard, the Committee notes with interest that several provisions of the draft Code provide for protection against anti-union discrimination. Section 41(1) of the draft Labour Code provides that union membership or participation in union activities shall not constitute valid reasons for termination. Under section 39 of the draft Code, a worker whose employment has been terminated has the right to challenge his or her termination before the Employment Termination Committee or before the labour courts, within a period of 15 days after receiving notification of termination. Section 41(2) of the draft Code provides, moreover, that the Employment Termination Committee and the courts may order reinstatement and back pay in cases of unjust termination; where the worker does not demand reinstatement, or where reinstatement is not feasible, the Employment Termination Committee and the courts may order compensation in an amount at their discretion, provided that such compensation is sufficiently dissuasive so as to punish the unjust termination.

The Committee notes that section 139 of the draft Labour Code also affords protection from acts of discrimination, for limited time periods, to trade union founders and trade union presidents and workers’ representatives, respectively. Section 139(1) provides that any dismissal and any measure short of dismissal whereby a trade union founder has been prejudiced shall be deemed to be anti-union discrimination, and shall be prohibited from the date of the lodging of an application for trade union registration until six months after the trade union has been registered. Similarly, section 139(2) states that protection from anti-union discrimination shall be granted to trade union presidents and workers’ representatives for a period beginning 30 days before the election of the individuals concerned, if notice of their candidature had been given to the employer, and ending either 30 days after the election – if they had not been elected – or six months after the end of the performance of their duties as elected union officials. The Committee further notes that section 139(6) limits the scope of the protection established under section 139(2) to five workers in enterprises employing less than 50 workers, to seven workers in enterprises employing from 50 to 100 workers, and to two additional protected workers for every additional 100 workers employed in the enterprise. Finally, the Committee notes that under section 139(3) all acts of anti-union discrimination shall be deemed to be null and void, and employers found liable for such an offence shall be subject to a fine of 100–500,000 dinars.

The Committee notes, however, that the protections of section 139 do not extend throughout the full course of employment, including at the time of recruitment, and apply only to trade union founders, presidents and workers’ representatives. The Committee additionally notes that sections 41 and 139 do not set out time frames for the completion of anti-union discrimination proceedings, and that, although section 41 states that compensation amounts “sufficiently dissuasive so as to punish dismissals” may be ordered, section 139 does not expressly provide for remedies to fully compensate victims of anti-union discrimination.

As regards adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination, the Committee recalls that such protection applies equally to trade union members and former trade union officials as to current trade union leaders, and covers not only dismissals but all measures of anti-union discrimination (transfers, demotions, and any other prejudicial acts). The Committee recalls moreover that the protection provided for in the Convention covers both the time of recruitment and the period of employment, including the time of work termination. Finally, the Committee recalls that the existence of general provisions prohibiting acts of anti-union discrimination is not enough if they are not accompanied by effective and rapid procedures to ensure their application in practice. Hence, the importance of Article 3 of the Convention, which provides that “machinery appropriate to national conditions shall be established, where necessary, for the purpose of ensuring respect for the right to organize …” as defined in Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Such protection against acts of anti-union discrimination may thus take various forms adapted to national legislation and practice, provided that they prevent or effectively redress anti-union discrimination (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraphs 202–224). The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend the draft Labour Code so as to ensure for trade union members and representatives adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination, in accordance with the principles outlined above.

Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee notes with interest that section 137(1) of the draft Labour Code provides that trade unions shall be entitled to represent their members in relation to any matter involving their collective interests, and to engage in collective bargaining. It additionally notes with interest that under section 141(1) collective bargaining may take place at all levels. The Committee further notes that section 142 establishes a duty to bargain in good faith when a request to open collective negotiations has been submitted by a registered union representing no less than 50 per cent of the workers employed at the establishment or enterprise concerned, or where a request to open collective negotiations has been jointly submitted by several registered trade unions if the latter collectively represent no less than 50 per cent of the workers to whom the collective agreement is to apply. In this connection, the Committee recalls that problems may arise when the law stipulates that a trade union must receive the support of 50 per cent of the members of a bargaining unit to be recognized as a bargaining agent: a majority union which fails to secure this absolute majority is thus denied the possibility of bargaining. The Committee considers that under such a system, if no union – or group of unions, as provided for in section 142 – covers more than 50 per cent of the workers, collective bargaining rights should be granted to all the unions in the unit concerned, at least on behalf of their own members (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 242). The Committee requests the Government to take the appropriate steps to amend section 142 of the draft Labour Code accordingly.

Articles 1, 4 and 6. The Committee had previously noted that Act No. 150 of 1987 concerning public servants does not contain any provisions ensuring that the guarantees provided for by the Convention apply to public servants and employees not engaged in the administration of the State. The Committee notes that section 2 of the draft Labour Code includes “workers listed as officials in state and public sector departments” within the scope of the draft Code’s provisions, but excludes “workers listed as civil servants and civil pensioners” from them. In this respect, the Committee recalls that Article 6 authorizes to exclude public servants engaged in the administration of the State from the scope of the Convention and that, in defining this exception, a distinction must be drawn between, on the one hand, public servants who by their functions are directly employed in the administration of the State (government ministry officials, for example) and who may be excluded from the scope of the Convention and, on the other hand, all other persons employed by the Government, by public enterprises or by autonomous public institutions, who should benefit from the guarantees provided for in the Convention (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 200). In the light of the above, the Committee asks the Government to indicate the specific categories of workers covered by the term “civil servants and civil pensioners” in section 2 of the draft Labour Code, and to ensure that the draft Code includes a provision recognizing the application of the Convention’s guarantees to all public servants not engaged in the administration of the State.

The Committee expresses the hope that the Government will take the appropriate measures to bring the draft legislation into full conformity with the Convention and requests it to transmit a copy of the Labour Code upon its adoption.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s communication.

Although the Committee is aware of the ongoing process of reconstruction of the country and the climate of violence, the Committee hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures for the effective implementation of the Convention with regard to the points raised below, and that the draft Labour Code will soon be adopted and will be in full conformity with the requirements of the Convention. The Committee notes that, in its communication, the Government expresses the wish for a wider cooperation with the ILO in several domains, including the application of freedom of association and the right to organize and participation in the framework of fundamental principles at work, in order to reach the objective of decent work; the Government wishes as well to develop a programme for social partnership and to widen social dialogue. The Committee supports the approach.

The Committee notes the comments made by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) dated 10 August 2006 underlining serious cases of violence and other grave violations of freedom of association and collective bargaining in Iraq in the current context of the official recognition of one single federation. The Committee requests the Government to respond to these comments.

Articles 1 and 4 of the Convention. In its last comments, the Committee noted that neither the Labour Code (Act No. 71 of 1987) nor Act No. 52 of 1987 on trade union organizations contain provisions giving effect to Articles 1 and 4 of the Convention. The Committee recalled that the Government has indicated that measures had been taken to amend the Labour Code in the manner desired by the Committee. In its communication, the Government indicates that the current Labour Law sections amended by Law No. 17/2000 allow workers in mixed, cooperative and private sectors the right to collective bargaining, but it acknowledges that the practical implementation of this right has been difficult under the difficult circumstances the country is facing. Noting that the process of preparing a new Labour Code began in 2004, the Committee expresses the hope that these amendments will be adopted as soon as possible, in order to include in the legislation provisions guaranteeing an adequate protection of workers against any acts of anti-union discrimination through dissuasive sanctions and to promote the preparation and full use of collective bargaining mechanisms particularly in the private, mixed and cooperative sectors.

Articles 1, 4 and 6. In its last comments, the Committee had also noted that Act No. 150 of 1987 concerning public servants does not contain any provisions ensuring that the guarantees provided for by the Convention apply to public servants and employees not engaged in the administration of the State. The Government had indicated in a previous report that public servants enjoy protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and have the right to collective bargaining of their employment conditions, in conformity with the legislation applicable to the enterprises and institutions which employ them. The Committee requests once again the Government to provide a copy of any legislation guaranteeing for public servants protection from acts of anti-union discrimination and establishing the right to collective bargaining for public servants not engaged in the administration of the State, as well as information on the number of collective agreements concluded in the public and private sectors and the number of workers covered.

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

The Committee notes that it has not received the Government’s report. While bearing in mind the ongoing process of reconstruction in the country and the climate of violence, the Committee recalls that its observations mainly concerned the following points.

Articles 1 and 4 of the Convention. The Committee noted that neither the Labour Code (Act No. 71 of 1987) nor Act No. 52 of 1987 on trade union organizations contain provisions giving effect to Articles 1 and 4 of the Convention. It recalls that the Government indicated that measures had been taken to amend the Labour Code in the manner desired by the Committee. Noting that the process of preparing a new Labour Code began in 2004, the Committee expresses the hope that these amendments will be adopted as soon as possible, in order to include in the legislation provisions guaranteeing the protection of workers against any acts of anti-union discrimination and to promote the preparation and full use of collective bargaining mechanisms in the private, mixed and cooperative sectors.

Articles 1, 4 and 6. The Committee also noted that Act No. 150 of 1987 concerning public servants does not contain any provisions ensuring that the guarantees provided for by the Convention apply to public servants and employees not engaged in the administration of the State. It recalls that the Government indicated that public servants enjoy protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and have the right to collective bargaining when negotiating their employment conditions, in conformity with the legislation applicable in the enterprises and institutions which employ them. The Committee requests the Government to provide a copy of the applicable legislation for examination at its next session, as well as information on the number of collective agreements concluded in the public and private sectors and the number of workers covered.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report.

The Committee notes the information supplied by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) dated 18 September 2002, concerning the application of the Convention. The Committee requests that the Government transmit its observations in this regard so that it may examine these points at its next meeting.

Articles 1 and 4 of the Convention. The Committee had observed that the Labour Code (No. 71 of 1987) and Act No. 52 of 1987 regarding trade union organizations contain no provisions on the application of Articles 1 and 4 of the Convention. It notes that, in its latest report, the Government states that measures have been adopted with a view to amending the Labour Code in conformity with Article 1 and that, with reference to Article 4, a new chapter on collective agreements has been introduced in the Labour Code. The Government adds that it will send the relevant texts as soon as they are adopted by the legislature. The Committee expresses the hope that the amendments will be adopted as soon as possible and that they will take into account its comments, so as to introduce into the legislation provisions guaranteeing the protection of workers against all acts of anti-union discrimination, enforceable by sufficiently effective and dissuasive sanctions, and to encourage and promote the full development and utilization of machinery for the voluntary negotiation of collective agreements in the private, mixed and cooperative sectors. The Committee requests the Government to provide the texts mentioned in its report as soon as possible for examination at its next meeting.

Articles 1, 4 and 6. The Committee had also observed that Act No. 150 of 1987 regarding public servants does not contain specific provisions to ensure that the guarantees of the Convention are applied to public employees not engaged in the administration of the State. It notes that, in its latest report, the Government states that public servants enjoy protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and have the right to negotiate their conditions of employment collectively in accordance with the laws and regulations applicable in the enterprises and the institutions in which they work. The Government states that it will send the relevant laws in due course. The Committee once again requests the Government to supply copies of the laws and regulations applicable to the state and public enterprises and independent public institutions as well as information on the practice followed in the abovementioned establishments (how negotiations are conducted, number of agreements concluded, number of public employees covered, etc.). The Committee requests the Government to provide the texts mentioned in its report for examination at its next meeting.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

Articles 1 and 4 of the Convention. The Committee had observed that the Labour Code (No. 71 of 1987) and Act No. 52 of 1987 regarding trade union organizations contain no provisions that ensure the application of Articles 1 and 4 of the Convention. It notes that the amendments referred to previously are still under discussion and that the Government states it will provide the text as soon as it is adopted. The Committee expresses the hope that the amendments will be adopted soon and that they will take into account its comments, so as to introduce into the legislation provisions guaranteeing the protection of workers against all acts of anti-union discrimination, enforceable by sufficiently effective and dissuasive sanctions, and to encourage and promote the full development and utilization of machinery for the voluntary negotiation of collective agreements in the private, mixed and cooperative sectors.

Articles 1, 4 and 6. The Committee also observed that Act No. 150 of 1987 regarding public servants does not contain specific provisions to ensure that the guarantees of the Convention are applied to public employees not engaged in the administration of the State. The Committee had asked the Government to supply copies of the laws and regulations applicable to the State and public enterprises and independent public institutions. The Government states that it will send these copies in due course. The Committee had also asked for information on how negotiations are conducted in practice in the abovementioned establishments (number of agreements concluded, number of public employees covered, etc.).

The Committee recalls that under the terms of the Convention public employees not engaged in the administration of the State should enjoy adequate protection against anti-union discrimination and be granted the right to negotiate their terms and conditions of employment collectively.

The Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary measures in the very near future to apply the Convention and that it will provide the abovementioned texts and information with its next report.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report.

Articles 1 and 4 of the Convention.  The Committee had observed that the Labour Code (No. 71 of 1987) and Act No. 52 of 1987 regarding trade union organizations contain no provisions that ensure the application of Articles 1 and 4 of the Convention. It notes that the amendments referred to previously are still under discussion and that the Government states it will provide the text as soon as it is adopted. The Committee expresses the hope that the amendments will be adopted soon and that they will take into account its comments, so as to introduce into the legislation provisions guaranteeing the protection of workers against all acts of anti-union discrimination, enforceable by sufficiently effective and dissuasive sanctions, and to encourage and promote the full development and utilization of machinery for the voluntary negotiation of collective agreements in the private, mixed and cooperative sectors.

Articles 1, 4 and 6.  The Committee also observed that Act No. 150 of 1987 regarding public servants does not contain specific provisions to ensure that the guarantees of the Convention are applied to public employees not engaged in the administration of the State. The Committee had asked the Government to supply copies of the laws and regulations applicable to the State and public enterprises and independent public institutions. The Government states that it will send these copies in due course. The Committee had also asked for information on how negotiations are conducted in practice in the abovementioned establishments (number of agreements concluded, number of public employees covered, etc.).

The Committee recalls that under the terms of the Convention public employees not engaged in the administration of the State should enjoy adequate protection against anti-union discrimination and be granted the right to negotiate their terms and conditions of employment collectively.

The Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary measures to apply the Convention and that it will provide the abovementioned texts and information with its next report.

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

The Committee notes with regret that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation on the following matters:

Articles 1 and 4 of the Convention. The Committee had observed that the Labour Code (No. 71 of 1987) and Act No. 52 of 1987 respecting trade union organizations contain no provisions to ensure the application of Articles 1 and 4 of the Convention. It notes that the amendments referred to previously are still under consideration and study and that the Government will provide the text as soon as it is adopted. The Committee expresses the hope that the amendments will be adopted soon and that they will take into account its comments, so as to introduce into the legislation provisions to the effect of guaranteeing the protection of workers against all acts of anti-union discrimination, enforceable by sufficiently effective and dissuasive sanctions, and to encourage and promote the full development and utilization of machinery for voluntary negotiation of collective agreements in the private, mixed and cooperative sectors. Articles 1, 4 and 6. The Committee also observed that Act No. 150 of 1987 respecting public servants does not contain specific provisions to ensure that the guarantees of the Convention are applied to public employees not engaged in the administration of the State. It had asked the Government to supply copies of the laws and regulations referred to in the matter and applicable to the State and public enterprises and independent public institutions. The Committee had also asked for information on how negotiations are conducted in practice in the abovementioned establishments (for example number of agreements concluded, number of public employees covered, etc.). The Committee recalls that public employees not engaged in the administration of the State should under the terms of the Convention enjoy adequate protection against anti-union discrimination and be granted the right to negotiate their terms and conditions of employment collectively. The Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary measures to apply the Convention and that it will provide the abovementioned texts and information with its next report.

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

The Committee notes the Government's report.

It recalls that it has been asking the Government to take specific measures to ensure that the Convention is applied.

Articles 1 and 4 of the Convention. The Committee had observed that the Labour Code (No. 71 of 1987) and Act No. 52 of 1987 respecting trade union organizations contain no provisions to ensure the application of Articles 1 and 4 of the Convention. It notes that the amendments referred to previously are still under consideration and study and that the Government will provide the text as soon as it is adopted.

The Committee expresses the hope that the amendments will be adopted soon and that they will take into account its comments, so as to introduce into the legislation provisions to the effect of guaranteeing the protection of workers against all acts of anti-union discrimination, enforceable by sufficiently effective and dissuasive sanctions, and to encourage and promote the full development and utilization of machinery for voluntary negotiation of collective agreements in the private, mixed and cooperative sectors.

Articles 1, 4 and 6. The Committee also observed that Act No. 150 of 1987 respecting public servants does not contain specific provisions to ensure that the guarantees of the Convention are applied to public employees not engaged in the administration of the State. It had asked the Government to supply copies of the laws and regulations referred to in the matter and applicable to the State and public enterprises and independent public institutions. It notes the Government's statement that it will provide the requested laws at a later stage.

The Committee had also asked for information on how negotiations are conducted in practice in the above-mentioned establishments (for example number of agreements concluded, number of public employees covered, etc.).

The Committee recalls that public employees (other than those engaged in the administration of the State) should enjoy adequate protection against anti-union discrimination and be granted the right to negotiate their terms and conditions of employment collectively.

The Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary measures to apply the Convention and that it will provide the above-mentioned texts and information with its next report.

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

The Committee takes note of the information supplied by the Government in its report.

It recalls that for several years it has been asking the Government to take specific measures to ensure that the Convention is applied, in view of:

- the lack of appropriate provisions to ensure the protection of workers against all acts of anti-union discrimination by employers at the time of taking up employment and during employment (Article 1 of the Convention);

- the lack of legislative provisions concerning the promotion of collective bargaining between employers or employers' organizations and workers' organizations with a view to the regulation of terms and conditions of employment (Article 4);

- the lack of provisions to guarantee that persons employed by the State, public enterprises and independent public institutions, who are not engaged in the administration of the State (such as teachers) and workers in the socialized sector have the right to be protected against all acts of anti-union discrimination and the right to negotiate their conditions of employment collectively (Articles 1, 4 and 6).

Articles 1 and 4. The Government indicates that the necessary measures have been taken to amend the Labour Code (No. 71 of 1987) in order to bring it into line with the provisions of Article 1 of the Convention and that a new chapter entitled "Collective labour contracts" has been introduced into the Code. The Government adds that it will provide copies of the amendments as soon as they are adopted by the legislative authorities.

The Committee recalls that Act No. 71 of 1987 to issue the Labour Code and Act No. 52 of 1987 respecting trade union organizations contain no provisions to ensure the application of the Convention. The Committee is therefore bound once again to urge the Government to take specific measures at the earliest possible date to guarantee the protection of workers against all acts of anti-union discrimination, enforceable by sufficiently effective and dissuasive sanctions, and to encourage and promote the full development and utilization of machinery for voluntary negotiation of collective agreements in the private, mixed and cooperative sectors. In this respect, it asks the Government to supply, along with its next report, copies of the new provisions to which it refers so that the Committee may ascertain whether they are consistent with the requirements of the Convention.

Articles 1, 4 and 6. The Government indicates that persons employed by the State or by public enterprises and independent public institutions, other than those engaged in the administration of the State (such as teachers) and workers in the socialized sector have the right to be protected against all acts of anti-union discrimination and to negotiate their terms and conditions of employment collectively, in accordance with the laws and regulations which apply in enterprises and establishments where such workers are employed.

The Committee recalls that Act No. 150 of 1987 respecting public servants does not contain specific provisions guaranteeing that public employees enjoy protection against anti-union discrimination and granting them the right to negotiate their terms and conditions of employment collectively. It therefore asks the Government to provide with its next report copies of all the laws and regulations to which it refers, together with information on how negotiations are conducted in practice in the above-mentioned establishments (number of agreements concluded, number of workers covered, etc., if any).

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

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

It recalls that for several years it has been asking the Government to take specific measures to ensure that the Convention is applied, in view of: - the lack of appropriate provisions to ensure the protection of workers against all acts of anti-union discrimination by employers at the time of taking up employment and during employment (Article 1 of the Convention); - the lack of legislative provisions concerning the promotion of collective bargaining between employers or employers' organizations and workers' organizations with a view to the regulation of terms and conditions of employment (Article 4); - the lack of provisions to guarantee that persons employed by the State, public enterprises and independent public institutions, who are not engaged in the administration of the State (such as teachers) and workers in the socialized sector have the right to be protected against all acts of anti-union discrimination and the right to negotiate their conditions of employment collectively (Articles 1, 4 and 6). Articles 1 and 4. The Government indicates that appropriate measures have been taken to amend the Labour Code (No. 71 of 1987) in order to bring it into line with the provisions of Article 1 of the Convention and that a new chapter entitled "Collective labour contracts" has been introduced into the Code. The Government adds that it will provide copies of the amendments as soon as the legislative procedures have been completed. The Committee recalls that Act No. 71 of 1987 to issue the Labour Code and Act No. 52 of 1987 respecting trade union organizations contain no provisions to ensure the application of the Convention. The Committee is therefore bound once again to urge the Government to take specific measures at the earliest possible date to guarantee the protection of workers against all acts of anti-union discrimination, enforceable by sufficiently effective and dissuasive sanctions, and to encourage and promote the full development and utilization of machinery for voluntary negotiation of collective agreements in the private, mixed and cooperative sectors. It asks the Government to supply copies of the new provisions to which it refers so that the Committee may ascertain whether they are consistent with the requirements of the Convention. Articles 1, 4 and 6. The Government indicates that persons employed by the State or by public enterprises and independent public institutions, other than those engaged in the administration of the State (such as teachers) and workers in the socialized sector have the right to be protected against all acts of anti-union discrimination and to negotiate their terms and conditions of employment collectively, in accordance with the laws and regulations which apply in enterprises and establishments where such workers are employed. The Committee recalls that Act No. 150 of 1987 respecting public servants does not contain specific provisions guaranteeing that public employees enjoy protection against anti-union discrimination and granting them the right to negotiate their terms and conditions of employment collectively. It therefore asks the Government to provide with its next report copies of all the laws and regulations to which it refers, together with information on how negotiations are conducted in practice in the above-mentioned establishments (number of agreements concluded, number of workers covered, etc., if any).

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

The Committee takes note of the information supplied by the Government in its reports.

It recalls that for several years it has been asking the Government to take specific measures to ensure that the Convention is applied, in view of:

- the lack of appropriate provisions to ensure the protection of workers against all acts of anti-union discrimination by employers at the time of taking up employment and during employment (Article 1 of the Convention);

- the lack of legislative provisions concerning the promotion of collective bargaining between employers or employers' organizations and workers' organizations with a view to the regulation of terms and conditions of employment (Article 4);

- the lack of provisions to guarantee that persons employed by the State, public enterprises and independent public institutions, who are not engaged in the administration of the State (such as teachers) and workers in the socialized sector have the right to be protected against all acts of anti-union discrimination and the right to negotiate their conditions of employment collectively (Articles 1, 4 and 6).

Articles 1 and 4. The Government indicates that appropriate measures have been taken to amend the Labour Code (No. 71 of 1987) in order to bring it into line with the provisions of Article 1 of the Convention and that a new chapter entitled "Collective labour contracts" has been introduced into the Code. The Government adds that it will provide copies of the amendments as soon as the legislative procedures have been completed.

The Committee recalls that Act No. 71 of 1987 to issue the Labour Code and Act No. 52 of 1987 respecting trade union organizations contain no provisions to ensure the application of the Convention. The Committee is therefore bound once again to urge the Government to take specific measures at the earliest possible date to guarantee the protection of workers against all act of anti-union discrimination, enforceable by sufficiently effective and dissuasive sanctions, and to encourage and promote the full development and utilization of machinery for voluntary negotiation of collective agreements in the private, mixed and cooperative sectors. It asks the Government to supply copies of the new provisions to which it refers so that the Committee may ascertain whether they are consistent with the requirements of the Convention.

Articles 1, 4 and 6. The Government indicates that persons employed by the State or by public enterprises and independent public institutions, other than those engaged in the administration of the State (such as teachers) and workers in the socialized sector have the right to be protected against all acts of anti-union discrimination and to negotiate their terms and conditions of employment collectively, in accordance with the laws and regulations which apply in enterprises and establishments where such workers are employed.

The Committee recalls that Act No. 150 of 1987 respecting public servants does not contain specific provisions guaranteeing that public employees enjoy protection against anti-union discrimination and granting them the right to negotiate their terms and conditions of employment collectively. It therefore asks the Government to provide with its next report copies of all the laws and regulations to which it refers, together with information on how negotiations are conducted in practice in the above-mentioned establishments (number of agreements concluded, number of workers covered, etc., if any).

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

The Committee takes note of the information supplied by the Government in its report.

Article 1 of the Convention. In its previous observation, the Committee noted with regret that Act No. 71 of 1987 issuing the Labour Code and Act No. 52 of 1987 on trade union organisations contain no specific provision guaranteeing application of this provision of the Convention, unlike the 1970 Labour Code (sections 21 and 29) which provided some protection for workers and trade union officers in this respect. The Committee asked the Government to adopt specific legislation ensuring the protection of workers against all acts of anti-union discrimination by employers.

The Committee notes that in response to this request, the Government merely indicates that section 127 of the Labour Code provides a restrictive list of cases where employers may dismiss workers and that none of the cases permit a worker to be dismissed on grounds of trade union activities or membership. It adds that section 2 of the Code guarantees every worker the right to work irrespective of any trade union affiliation.

The Committee observes that the sections referred to by the Government contain no specific provisions ensuring the application of the Convention. It recalls that protection against acts of anti-union discrimination covers not only cases of dismissal but any other discriminatory measure at the time of taking up employment and during employment, for example in the event of transfers, demotions and disciplinary or other measures.

Accordingly, the Committee urges the Government to adopt specific measures to guarantee adequate protection for workers against all acts of anti-union discrimination, both at the time of taking up employment and during the working relationship, accompanied by sufficiently effective and dissuasive sanctions, and to provide information on any progress made in this respect.

Article 2. With reference to its previous observation, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government to the effect that employers' and workers' organisations have their own laws which grant them financial independence and contain no provisions allowing interference in the affairs of other organisations.

Article 4. In its previous observation, the Committee noted with regret that the provisions concerning collective agreements contained in the former Labour Code had not been reproduced in the new legislation.

The Committee notes the Government's information to the effect that the absence of legislative provisions concerning collective bargaining does not mean that the principle of free negotiation is not respected. In this connection, the Government refers to section 150 of the Labour Code under which all matters not governed by the Labour Code are regulated in conformity with the provisions of the international labour Conventions ratified by Iraq. In practice, workers' organisations discuss their employment and pay conditions when collective agreements are concluded, and the Confederation of Workers' Unions is a member of the Minimum Wage Rate Commission established under section 46 of the Code.

The Committee refers to the terms of Article 4 of the Convention and asks the Government to provide information on measures to encourage the development and utilisation of machinery for voluntary negotiation of collective agreements in the private, mixed and co-operative sectors. It also asks the Government to provide detailed information on the number of collective agreements concluded, the sectors covered and the number of workers covered by collective agreements.

Articles 4 and 6. In its previous observation, the Committee asked the Government to take measures to guarantee that persons employed by the State and workers in the socialised sector assimilated to public employees in national legislation (Act No. 150 of 1987) enjoy the rights and guarantees provided for in the Convention.

The Committee notes from the information supplied by the Government that in this respect, the status of workers (state employees and workers in the socialised sector) has not changed.

Accordingly, the Committee recalls that under Article 6 of the Convention only public servants engaged in the administration of the State are not covered by the Convention. It therefore once again requests the Government to take measures to guarantee that persons employed by the State, public enterprises and independent public institutions who are not engaged in the administration of the State (such as teachers) and workers in the socialised sector enjoy the right to be protected against all acts of anti-union discrimination and to negotiate their conditions of employment collectively, in accordance with Articles 1 and 4 of the Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1989, published 76th ILC session (1989)

The Committee takes notes of the Government's report. It also takes note of Act No. 71 of 1987 issuing the Labour Code and Act No. 52 of 1987 on trade union organisations.

For a number of years, the Committee has been raising the following points in its comments:

- the need to adopt explicit legislative provisions, accompanied by civil remedies and penal sanctions, to ensure the protection of workers against any act of anti-union discrimination by employers, not only in the event of dismissal, as provided for in sections 21 and 29 of the 1970 Labour Code, but also at the time of taking up employment and during the employment relationship, such as transfer and demotions, in order to bring its legislation into conformity with Article 1 of the Convention;

- the need to adopt legislative provisions ensuring the protection of workers' organisations against any acts of interference by employers or their organisations (Article 2).

1. Article 1 of the Convention. With regard to the protection of workers against acts of anti-union discrimination by an employer at the time of recruitment or during the employment relationship, the Committee notes with regret that Act No. 71 of 1987 issuing the Labour Code contains no specific provision for this purpose. Furthermore, the Committee takes due note of the fact that the legislation provides for the reinstatement of a worker when the Industrial Tribunal considers that dismissal is based on an error or on the bad faith of the employer. However, the Committee regrets that the provisions of the former Labour Code (sections 21, 29 and 246) which prohibited dismissal for trade union activities, accompanied by penal sanctions, have not been reproduced in the new Labour Code.

The Committee asks the Government to amend its legislation to provide that it is unlawful for a worker's employment to be conditional upon his membership or non-membership of a union, and for a worker to be dismissed or prejudiced by transfers, demotions or other measures, on grounds of trade union membership or participation in union activities. This prohibition should be accompanied by civil remedies and penal sanctions against the employer.

2. Article 2. With regard to the protection of workers' organisations against acts of interference by employers or their organisations in trade union affairs, the Government refers to sections 9 and 21 of the new Labour Code under which all trade unions and the General Confederation of Trade Unions enjoy legal personality and financial and administrative autonomy for the achievement of their goals.

In the view of the Committee, these provisions which reiterate the principle of the provisions of the former Labour Code (sections 210, 227, 233 and 237), do not cover the protection set forth in Article 2 of the Convention.

The Committee requests the Government to adopt specific measures prohibiting employers from supporting workers' organisations by financial or other means, with the object of placing such organisations under the control of employers, in particular through legislative means, accompanied by civil remedies and penal sanctions, to ensure that workers' organisations enjoy adequate protection against any interference by employers or their organisations, in accordance with Article 2 of the Convention.

3. Article 4. With reference to the new Labour Code, the Committee notes with regret that the provisions on collective agreements contained in the former Code have not been reproduced in the new labour legislation. It also notes that the provisions of Act No. 52 of 1987 on trade union organisations, concerning the attributions of the various trade union bodies (sections 6, 10, 20 and 27), do not seem to include collective bargaining with a view to establishing the conditions of employment and wages of their members.

The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which the trade union organisations in the private, mixed and co-operative sectors covered by the new Labour Code, negotiate their conditions of employment and wages.

4. Articles 4 and 6. The Committee notes from the information communicated by the Government that, under Act No. 150 of 1987, workers in the employment of the State and workers in the socialised sector are treated as civil servants.

The Committee recalls that, although the Convention does not deal with the position of public servants engaged in the administration of the State (Article 6 of the Convention), it has never envisaged the possibility of important categories of workers employed by the State being excluded from the benefits of the Convention merely because they are formally assimilated to certain public servants.

The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, the measures taken or under consideration to guarantee that persons employed by the State, public enterprises and independent public institutions, who are not engaged in the administration of the State, such as teachers and workers in the socialised sector in particular, enjoy the right to be protected against any act of anti-union discrimination and to negotiate their conditions of employment collectively, in accordance with Articles 1, 2 and 4 of the Convention.