Observación (CEACR) - Adopción: 1994, Publicación: 81ª reunión CIT (1994)

In reply to the Committee's earlier comments, which have been made for a number of years, the Government indicates that there has been no change in the existing legislation. The Government adds, however, that it has taken due note of the Committee's comments. In this situation the Committee cannot but once again ask the Government to take the necessary measures in order to bring national legislation and practice into full conformity with the following Articles of the Convention:

Article 5 of the Convention. Section 8 of the Workmen's Compensation Ordinance No. 24 of 1956 should be completed so as to ensure that the compensation due in the event of accidents causing permanent incapacity shall be paid in the form of periodical payments to the injured workman or his dependants. However, the compensation may be paid wholly or partially in a lump sum, if the competent authority is given guarantees that it will be properly utilized.

Article 7. Section 9 of Ordinance No. 24 of 1956 does not provide for additional compensation in respect of the assistance of a third person except in cases of temporary incapacity, whereas the Convention provides in such cases for the provision of additional compensation to the victims of injuries who suffer from temporary or permanent incapacity.

Article 9. In accordance with section 6, paragraph 3, of Ordinance No. 24 of 1956, the employer is responsible for paying the "expenses and reasonable cost" of medical treatment up to a prescribed amount, whereas the Convention does not prescribe any limits in this respect. Furthermore, surgical and pharmaceutical assistance would not appear to be provided for in the legislation in accordance with this Article of the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary steps in order to ensure that full effect is given to this provision of the Convention.

Article 10. The Committee notes from the Government's report that there are no provisions under which the supply of surgical appliances is generally prescribed. It points out that section 10 of Ordinance No. 24 of 1956 provides for the supply of artificial limbs only when this is likely to improve capacity for work, whereas the Convention prescribes this in all cases when they are recognized to be necessary without permitting the supply of artificial limbs to be restricted to cases where they are necessary to improve capacity for work. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary steps in order to bring national legislation fully into conformity with this Article of the Convention.