Observación (CEACR) - Adopción: 1990, Publicación: 77ª reunión CIT (1990)

1. Article 2, paragraph 2(c), of the Convention. In comments that it has been making for some years, the Committee referred to the Prison Code (Decree No. 1817 of 1964) which imposes compulsory labour not only on persons who have been convicted (section 269), but also on all other detainees except those declared medically unfit (section 233).

The Committee noted from the information supplied by the Government that a special committee had been set up to amend the Prison Code so as to specifically prohibit the imposition of work on detainees.

The Committee notes that the Government's report contains no information on this question.

The Committee recalls once again that under the Convention labour may be imposed only on prisoners who have been convicted in a court of law. Prisoners awaiting trial or persons detained without trial may work if they so wish on a purely voluntary basis (paragraph 90 of the 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour).

In view of the fact that section 233 of the Prison Code, in its current form, provides for compulsory labour for detainees, in contradiction with the provisions of the Convention on this point, and that, according to the Government's indications, in practice detainees are not obliged to work, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend sections 233 and 266 of the Prison Code so as to give statutory effect to the practice referred to by the Government.

2. In comments that it has been making for some years, the Committee referred to section 182 of Decree No. 1817 of 1964, under which work in prison establishments may be arranged directly through the administration or through contractors who are provided with premises and the labour of detainees and convicted persons, and who in exchange supply the necessary equipment and materials for the work and pay wages in accordance with the terms and conditions laid down by the prison administration, and it requested the Government to take the necessary measures to give statutory effect to the principle that prisoners' work for private contractors must be based on a freely consented to employment relationship.

In its report, the Government indicates that sections 41 and 42 of the Prison Code do not envisage the supplementary sentence of labour and that section 45 of the same Code abolished the penalty of hard labour.

The Committee however notes that section 269 of the Prison Code that is currently in force (Decree No. 1817 of 1964) lays down that "in all penitentiaries, prison colonies and prisons, sentences are accompanied by the obligation to work during the day ...".

The Committee notes Decision No. 357 of 1986, a copy of which was supplied by the Government, which issues regulations under section 281 of Decree No. 1817 of 1964 (Prison Code) and sets out the organisational structure of prison labour.

Among the types of labour included in the organisation of prison labour is labour hired to private enterprises (section 1(d)). Moreover, section 3(4) of the same Decision lays down that the organisation and type of remuneration for labour hired to private enterprises shall be set out in the respective agreement, but that in no case may remuneration be less than 50 per cent of the minimum monthly wage fixed by the national Government.

The Committee points out that work by prisoners for private enterprises is compatible with the Convention only so far as the labour relationship can be assimilated to a free employment relationship, that is, if the prisoners concerned have fully consented to it, provided that there are appropriate guarantees, such as the payment of normal wages, social security, consent of the trade unions, etc. The Committee notes that there is no provision in national legislation to the effect that prisoners' work for private enterprises must be based on a freely consented to relationship. Furthermore, where private enterprises are permitted to pay prisoners wages that are less than the minimum wage, their relationship cannot be considered comparable to a free employment relationship.

To be able to ascertain the observance of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to supply copies of agreements that have been concluded between private enterprises and prison establishments. The Committee moreover hopes that the necessary measures will be taken in the near future to bring the legislation into conformity with practice, by giving statutory effect to the principle whereby prisoners' work for private enterprises must be based on a freely consented to employment relationship. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the progress achieved to this effect.