Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2018, Publicación: 108ª reunión CIT (2019)

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

Otros comentarios sobre C029

Observación

Solicitud directa

Visualizar en: Francés - EspañolVisualizar todo

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. 1. Trafficking in persons. The Committee notes the Government’s reference in its report to the provisions of the Penal Code (as amended in 2009), which prohibit trafficking in persons and punish that offence with imprisonment of five to ten years (sections 303 bis(4), 303 bis(5), 334, 335 and 342). It also notes the adoption of Presidential Decree No. 16-249 of 26 September 2016 establishing the structure and operation of the National Committee for the Prevention and Elimination of Trafficking in Persons. The core mandate of this committee is to establish a national policy and an action plan in the area of prevention and elimination of trafficking in persons and the protection of victims. It is also responsible for: (i) organizing awareness-raising and mobilization activities; (ii) setting up a national database; and (iii) preparing an annual report on the situation of trafficking in persons in the country. The Committee further notes that training sessions on combating trafficking in persons, including for judges, have been organized in cooperation with the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.

As regards protection given to victims of trafficking, the Committee notes that the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), in its 2017 report entitled “Compilation on Algeria”, emphasized that the Human Rights Council (HRC), in the context of the universal periodic review, considered that the current mechanisms related to the protection of victims of trafficking were inadequate since the country did not have appropriate facilities to cater for them or mechanisms for referral (A/HRC/WG.6/27/DZA/2, paragraph 27). The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether a national policy and action plan to combat trafficking in persons have been adopted and, if so, to indicate the actions taken in this context. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate the steps taken for the identification and protection of trafficking victims, including the assistance services provided, and to send statistical data in this regard. Lastly, the Committee requests the Government to supply information on any court decisions issued and penalties imposed on the basis of the provisions of the Penal Code.

2. Punishment of vagrancy. In its previous comments, the Committee drew the Government’s attention to the broad definition of vagrancy laid down in section 196 of the Penal Code, whereby any person who, having no fixed abode or means of livelihood and ordinarily exercising no trade or occupation despite being fit for work, is unable to justify that he or she has sought work or has refused an offer of paid work shall be deemed guilty of vagrancy and shall be liable to imprisonment ranging from one to six months. Such a definition, which is not limited to activities that are unlawful or likely to disturb public order, is tantamount to an indirect constraint to work, which is contrary to the provisions of the Convention. The Committee asked the Government to provide information on the application in practice of section 196 of the Penal Code.

The Committee notes with regret that there is no information on this matter in the Government’s report. Since the terms of section 196 of the Penal Code can punish with imprisonment the simple fact of having no fixed abode or means of livelihood, ordinarily exercising no trade or occupation despite being fit for work, and being unable to demonstrate efforts to seek work or refusing paid work, the Committee requests the Government once again to take steps to limit the scope of section 196 of the Penal Code solely to persons who engage in unlawful activity or in activities likely to disturb public order. In the meantime, the Government is requested to provide information on the application in practice of section 196 by the courts and, if applicable, to supply copies of any relevant court decisions.

3. Freedom of seafarers to leave their employment. The Committee previously drew the Government’s attention to section 56 of Executive Decree No. 05-102 of 26 March 2005 establishing the conditions of employment of seafarers in merchant shipping and fisheries. Under section 56, the employment relationship may on no account be terminated outside the national territory. Furthermore, under sections 53 and 55, any seafarer wishing to terminate an employment relationship must inform the shipowner in writing, and the latter has 15 days following receipt of the letter to accept or refuse the resignation request. Referring to the explanations given by the Government, the Committee emphasized that even though section 56 protects seafarers against dismissal which could result in forcible disembarkation outside the national territory, this provision does not enable a seafarer to leave his employment after expiry of the notice period if he is not on national territory at that time.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that consideration will be given to amending Executive Decree No. 05-102 of 26 March 2005, especially in the wake of the ratification in July 2016 of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, as amended (MLC, 2006). While noting this indication, the Committee would like to remind the Government that the MLC, 2006, does not cover fishing vessels and is restricted to merchant shipping. In this regard, the Committee once again requests the Government to repeal or amend the provisions of section 56 of Executive Decree No. 05-102 of 26 March 2005 so that a seafarer can leave his employment after expiry of the statutory notice period even if he is outside the national territory.

Article 2(2)(a). Civil defence groups. Non-military work. The Committee previously noted that, under the provisions of Act No. 87-16 of 1 August 1987 establishing and determining the functions and structure of civil defence, citizens between 18 and 60 years of age are subject to the obligations of civil defence as part of national defence, and that they may be required in this context to participate in the protection of units of production and in the strengthening of the economic capacity of the country. The Government previously explained that Act No. 87-16 had become obsolete since it had never been applied in practice since its enactment.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 4 of Act No. 14-06 of 9 August 2014 concerning national service clearly stipulates that national service shall be purely military in character and take just one form within the structures of the national army. Hence the civil form of national service is abolished.

Article 2(2)(c). Prison labour. Hiring out of prison labour to private enterprises. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that Act No. 05-04 of 6 February 2005, issuing the Code on the organization of prisons and the social rehabilitation of prisoners, permits the hiring out of prison labour to private enterprises involved in the performance of work of public interest (section 100(2)). It noted the detailed information provided by the Government on the manner in which prisoners express their consent in practice to work on external sites or in open establishments, for either public or private enterprises, and on the organization of such work, the guarantees that apply to it, and the absence of any penalty for refusal to work for private enterprises. The Committee asked the Government to indicate whether, in practice, prisoners have been made to work for private enterprises, either in the context of the hiring out of labour or under any other arrangements.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the national legislation does not provide for any possibility of mobilizing prison labour and making it available to the private sector, since the country has substantial human resources capable of meeting the needs of the national labour market. However, the Committee notes that according to the provisions of Act No. 05-04 of 6 February 2005, prison labour could be hired out to private enterprises to perform public works. The Committee recalls that Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention expressly provides that persons shall not be hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations. However, referring to its 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, the Committee recalls that work done by convicted persons for private enterprises may be compatible with the Convention if the necessary safeguards exist to ensure that the persons concerned agree voluntarily to work, by giving their free and informed formal consent and without being subjected to pressure or the threat of any penalty. In such a situation, prison labour for private entities does not constitute a violation of the Convention, since no coercion occurs. Moreover, the Committee has considered that, in the prison context, the most reliable indicator of the voluntariness of labour is that the work is performed under conditions which approximate to a free labour relationship, including wages, social security, and occupational safety and health. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary steps to amend Act No. 05-04 of 6 February 2005 in order to bring it into conformity with the Convention and with the practice indicated.