Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2017, Publicación: 107ª reunión CIT (2018)

Convenio sobre la abolición del trabajo forzoso, 1957 (núm. 105) - Belarús (Ratificación : 1995)

Otros comentarios sobre C105

Observación

Solicitud directa

Visualizar en: Francés - EspañolVisualizar todo

Article 1(c) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour for breaches of labour discipline in the public service. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that pursuant to section 428(1) of the Criminal Code, the non-performance or improper performance by public officials of their duties as the result of a negligent attitude, causing a particularly large-scale damage or substantial harm to the legitimate rights and interests of persons or to state interests, was punishable by limitation of freedom for a period up to one year or imprisonment for a period up to two years, both sanctions involving compulsory labour. The Committee expressed its hope that the Government would take measures in order to amend section 428(1) by restricting its scope to essential services in the strict sense of the term or to acts which are committed in the exercise of functions which were essential to safety or in circumstances where life or health are in danger, as it was stipulated in section 428(2), or by repealing sanctions involving compulsory labour in order to bring its legislation in conformity with the Convention.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement in its report that, pursuant to Law No. 42-3 of 15 July 2009 on amendments and in addition to certain laws of the Republic of Belarus on matters of criminal responsibility and operational investigation, section 428 of the Criminal Code has been revised, penalizing failure or improper performance by officials of their duty, due to unfair or negligent attitude to services, which negligently causes human death or other grave consequences, or illegal disposal of destruction of state property resulting in damage on a large scale, including through its denationalization or privatization.

Article 1(d). Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for participation in strikes. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to section 397 of the Labour Code, under which participants in a strike deemed unlawful by a court of law may be held liable pursuant to disciplinary and other procedures prescribed by law. The Committee further noted that section 342 of the Criminal Code, which provides for sanctions of imprisonment or limitation of freedom, both involving compulsory labour, for the organization of group actions violating public order and resulting in disturbances of operation of transport or work of enterprises, institutions or organizations, and that section 310(1) of the Criminal Code, which provides for similar penal sanctions for the intentional blocking of transport communications, are both applicable to participants in unlawful strikes. The Government indicated that since 2010, one sanction of imprisonment has been imposed under section 342, but none under section 310.

The Committee notes the Government’s repeated indication that, under section 397 of the Labour Code, there is no penal liability for participation in strikes as such, but only for participation in illegal strikes. The Government states that a strike may be recognized as illegal where the requirements of the Labour Code or other laws are violated, and also in cases where an actual threat is created to national security, public order, public health or the rights and freedoms of other persons. The Committee also notes the Government’s information that from 2014 to the first six months of 2016, no cases were brought before or examined by the courts under section 342 of the Criminal Code. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures taken or envisaged to ensure, both in law and in practice, that no sanctions involving compulsory labour can be imposed for the mere fact of peacefully participating in strikes. It also requests the Government to continue providing information on the application in practice of sections 310 and 342 of the Criminal Code, including on relevant court decisions, indicating in particular the penalties applied.