Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2004, Publicación: 93ª reunión CIT (2005)

Article 1(a) of the Convention. The Committee recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the recourse to forced or compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, under section 39 of the Penal Code and section 40 of Ordinance No. 111/127 of 20 May 1961 concerning the prison system, work is compulsory for all convicted prisoners. It requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of sections 166 and 167 of the Penal Code, under which any person who makes use of the spoken, written or printed word to incite or attempt to incite the general public against the authorities or to alarm the general public, or any person who impugns the binding force of the law, shall be liable to imprisonment. This request was made to enable the Committee to evaluate the scope of these provisions in relation to the situations covered by the Convention. In its last report, the Government stated that copies of the court decisions issued under sections 166 and 167 of the Penal Code would be provided subsequently, as a separate communication from the report sent in September 2003. The Committee notes with regret that copies of the court decisions have still not been received at the Office. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide copies of the court decisions and information on the application in practice of sections 166 and 167 of the Penal Code defining or illustrating their scope, so as to enable the Committee to ascertain that the holding or expression of certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system without recourse to violence is not punished by imprisonment including compulsory labour.

In this context, the Committee notes Act No. 18/2002 of 11 May 2002 concerning the press and Organic Act No. 16/2003 of 27 June 2003 concerning political groupings and politicians. In view of the abovementioned developments, the Committee would also be grateful if the Government would provide information on the practical application, and copies if appropriate, of the court decisions relating to the following provisions:

-  section 83 of Act No. 18/2002 concerning the press, under which any person who by means of the press incites a third party to commit crimes or offences punishable by the Penal Code shall be deemed an accomplice and liable to the penalties laid down by the said Code if such incitement has repercussions or results in an attempted crime or offence (taking account of the abovementioned sections 166 and 167 of the Penal Code).

-  section 46 of Act No. 16/2003 concerning political groupings and politicians, under which, without prejudice to the penal provisions, any person who establishes or runs a political grouping in violation of the legislation shall be liable to imprisonment of six months to two years and a fine of 500,000 to 1,000,000 Rwandan francs or either of these two penalties, and any person who runs or participates in a political grouping which continues to operate after being suspended or a political grouping which is reconstituted after being dissolved shall be liable to the same penalties.

Article 1(c). For many years the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to section 29 of the Decree of 1 April 1983 establishing articles of agreement for inland navigation and sections 13 and 14 of the Decree of 11 May 1921 establishing the disciplinary and penal code for inland navigation, which are contrary to this provision of the Convention inasmuch as they allow prison sentences including compulsory labour to be imposed on sailors for breaches of discipline. In this regard, the Government stated in its report sent in 1999 that no cases involving the imprisonment of sailors for breaches of discipline had occurred, given the virtually non-existent traffic on Lake Kivu. While noting that the Government states that it takes note of its comments, the Committee hopes that, the next time the legislation on this subject is amended, the Government will be able to take the necessary measures to amend the abovementioned provisions in order to ensure that no prison sentence including compulsory labour can be imposed on sailors for breaches of discipline. The Committee meanwhile requests the Government to send a copy, where appropriate, of any legal court decisions issued pursuant to these provisions.

Article 1(d). In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, under section 191 of the Labour Code (Act No. 51/2001 of 30 December 2001), the right to strike of workers occupying jobs essential to the maintenance of the safety of persons and property and workers occupying jobs in which any stoppage would endanger human life and safety is exercised according to the procedures laid down by order of the minister responsible for labour issues. In addition, section 190 of the Labour Code allows an employer to take legal action against workers who have taken part in a strike deemed to be illegal by the competent authority. The Committee requested the Government to indicate the nature of the penalties incurred by workers against whom legal action had been taken by their employer, under section 190 of the Labour Code, and to send a copy of the Order governing the implementation of section 191.

In its last report, the Government indicates that the Order governing the implementation of section 191 of the Labour Code is being drawn up and that no court decisions has been issued further to any action taken by an employer against workers who have taken part in a strike deemed to be illegal by the competent authority. The Committee notes this information. It also notes that the Association of Christian Trade Unions (UMURIMO), in its comments transmitted to the Government on 13 January 2004, expresses its concern at the fact that it is almost impossible to carry out a legal strike because the procedure for settling collective disputes laid down in the Labour Code is extremely cumbersome and the ministerial order for the setting up of the Conciliation Council provided for in section 183 of the Labour Code has not yet been adopted. The Committee recalls that it requested the Government, in its comments on the application of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), to provide information on the circumstances in which workers could legally go on strike in practice, in view of the provisions of the Labour Code relating to the procedure for the settlement of collective disputes (section 183 read in conjunction with section 189). The Committee therefore again requests the Government to indicate the penalties incurred by strikers as a result of action taken against them under to section 190 of the Labour Code and to send a copy of the relevant court decisions. Please also send a copy of the Order establishing the procedures to be followed by workers exercising the right to strike referred to by section 191 of the Labour Code.

The Committee notes that article 35 of the Constitution guarantees freedom of association which is to be exercised under the conditions prescribed by law. It once again requests the Government to send a copy of the legislation regulating the exercise of freedom of association.