Observación (CEACR) - Adopción: 1993, Publicación: 80ª reunión CIT (1993)

1. In its comments, the Committee has been referring for many years to the Government's statement that draft ordinances have been drawn up with a view to repealing Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966, respecting the suppression of idleness (as amended by Ordinance No. 72/083 of 18 October 1972), section 11 of Ordinance No. 66/038 of 3 June 1966, respecting the supervision of the active population, and sections 2 and 6 of Ordinance No. 75/005 of 5 January 1975, making the performance of commercial, agricultural and pastoral activities compulsory. The Government indicated that the Ordinances in question have fallen into abeyance and are no longer applicable, and that the draft texts to repeal them formally had to be submitted to an expanded committee of the social partners. The Government also stated that it was aware of the need to bring its legislation and practice into conformity with international labour Conventions.

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its last report to the effect that Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966, respecting the suppression of idleness, is covered by a Bill to repeal it and that an expanded committee does in fact exist and is called the Legislative Commission.

The Committee takes due note of this information. In view of the fact that the Government has been referring to texts to repeal the above Ordinances for many years, the Committee hopes that the Government will supply the text of the Bill to repeal Ordinance No. 66/004 of 8 January 1966, respecting the suppression of idleness when adopted and that it will supply information on the other amendments which are necessary to give effect to the Convention on these points.

2. In its previous observations, the Committee also referred to section 28 of Act No. 60/109, respecting the development of the rural economy, which provides that minimum surfaces for cultivation shall be fixed for each rural community.

The Committee noted the Government's indications that these provisions were intended to supply a technical framework and basic services to farmers in order to increase their production, improve their standard of living, encourage them to expand the areas under cultivation and increase efforts in agricultural activities, since the freedom to work must not mean the freedom to do nothing. The Committee pointed out that the Convention authorizes recourse to compulsory cultivation only for preventing famine or a food deficit, and always under the condition that the food or produce shall remain the property of the producers. It also pointed out that any work or service exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily is incompatible with the Convention.

The Committee notes that the Government's report does not contain information in this respect and trusts that the Government will make every endeavour to take the necessary measures in the near future.