Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2015, Publicación: 105ª reunión CIT (2016)

Convenio sobre el trabajo forzoso, 1930 (núm. 29) - Iraq (Ratificación : 1962)

Otros comentarios sobre C029

Observación

Solicitud directa

Visualizar en: Francés - EspañolVisualizar todo

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Restrictions on the freedom to resign of persons in the service of the State. Over a number of years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the incompatibility of various legislative provisions, which restrict the freedom to resign of persons in the service of the State. It noted in particular section 40(1) and (2) of Act No. 201 of 1975 on civil maritime service, under the terms of which an application to resign filed by a civil officer or seafarer in the merchant navy may be refused and that such refusal is final. It also noted Resolutions Nos 917 of 1988 and 550 of 1989, which establish similar restrictions with regard to various categories of state officials; and section 35 of the Civil Service Act No. 24 of 1960, under which the resignation of an official is not valid unless accepted by the competent authority. Finally, the Committee noted that under section 364 of the Penal Code, any official or any person entrusted with public office may be punished with imprisonment if their absence from work may result in the paralysis of a public service. The Committee asked the Government to take the necessary measures in order to bring the above provisions into conformity with the Convention.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the Ministry of Justice has been informed about the Committee’s request and the Government will provide the relevant information as soon as possible. The Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend or repeal the abovementioned provisions so as to ensure the right of public officials and seafarers to leave service on their own initiative by giving notice of reasonable length.

Article 2(c). Obligation to work as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, by virtue of section 87 of the Penal Code of 1969, any prisoner sentenced to imprisonment for life or a shorter period is obliged to perform the work envisaged by the Act respecting prison establishments. It also noted that sections 88 and 89 specify that severe and shorter sentences are combined with the obligation to work. The Committee requested the Government to provide a copy of any text regulating the conditions of work of convicted persons.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Ministry of Justice has been informed about the Committee’s request and the Government will provide the relevant information as soon as possible. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide a copy of the Act on prison establishments and any text regulating the conditions of work of persons convicted to a prison sentence who are subject to the obligation to work. Please indicate whether work imposed upon convicted persons may be performed for the benefit of private entities.

Article 25. Penal sanctions for the exaction of forced labour. Over a number of years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to section 325 of the Penal Code, under which any public servant or person entrusted with a public service who exacts forced labour from individuals in circumstances other than those relating to the public interest, as set out in laws and regulations, or as required by a state of necessity, or who require them to work in cases other than those envisaged by the law, is liable to a sentence of imprisonment. The Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures to complete the legislation to ensure that both public officials and private entities which exact forced labour are liable to the penal sanctions, as envisaged in Article 25 of the Convention.

The Government’s indicates that the new Labour Code of 2015 which repeals Order No. 89 of 2004 was approved, and that section 11(2) specifies a sanction of imprisonment for a minimum period of six months for violation of the provisions on forced labour. Noting that according to this information, the penalties imposed on perpetrators of forced labour may be limited to short prison sentences, the Committee recalls that under Article 25 of the Convention, really adequate penalties must be applied to persons who exact forced labour. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of the provisions of both the Penal Code and the Labour Code in order to ensure that really adequate and dissuasive penal sanctions are applied on perpetrators of forced labour.