Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 1990, publiée 77ème session CIT (1990)

Article 1(a) of the Convention. 1. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that under section 1, paragraph 1, of Decree B-10 of 29 June 1983 respecting the prohibition of importation, carrying, sale, distribution, possession, storage, production and reproduction of prescribed publications, publications are prohibited which, in the opinion of the competent authorities, may seriously disturb the public order and national security. Under section 1, paragraph 2 of the Decree, the Council of Ministers is to define the scope of the publications mentioned in paragraph 1, and section 2 provides for the punishment of imprisonment or fine.

In its most recent report covering the period July 1987 to 30 June 1989, the Government indicates that court decisions under this legislation were not given and that the matter will be brought to the attention of the Ministry of Justice. The Committee asks the Government to provide with its next report information on developments in this area, including court decisions and decisions adopted by the Council of Ministers under section 1, paragraph 2, of the Decree, as well as any steps taken to ensure observance of the Convention.

2. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the National Decree of 20 July 1956 which submits both meetings open to the public and other meetings in the district of Paramaribo to prior authorisation under section 5 of the Royal Decree of 26 October 1933 (on the exercise of the right of assembly) and which, under sections 8 and 9 of the 1933 Decree, is enforceable with penalties involving compulsory labour. The Government has stated that the Decree is outdated and not applied in practice. The Committee once again notes the Government's indication repeated in its most recent report that this matter will be brought to the attention of the Ministry of Justice. As this question has now been the subject of the Committee's comments for a number of years, the Committee trusts that the necessary steps will soon be taken to bring the law into conformity with the practice and the Convention. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee asks the Government to continue supplying information on the practical application of the above-mentioned provisions.

Article 1(c) and (d). 3. In previous comments, the Committee noted the Government's statement that a draft decree prepared by the Minister of Justice to repeal sections 456-458, 462, 463 and 468, and to amend sections 455 and 464 of the Penal Code concerning penal provisions applying to seamen would be presented to the competent authority. The Committee noted the Government's indication that the said draft decree had been approved by the Council of Ministers but that approval by the National Assembly and its publication had not yet taken place. In its most recent report, the Government indicates that the question has not been settled yet. The Committee hopes that the Government will soon be able to indicate that this question, which has been the subject of comments for many years, has finally been settled.

4. In its previous direct request, the Committee asked the Government to supply information on the practical work of the National Institute for Human Rights established by the General Decree A-18 (S.B. 1985 No. 1). The Committee notes the Government's indication in its report that the information sought from the Institute in response to the Committee's request has not yet been received but that it will be communicated as soon as possible. The Committee looks forward to receiving the information with the Government's next report.

5. The Committee notes the information in the Government's report that on 1 September 1989 (S.B. 1989 No. 55) the General Decree A-22 of 1 December 1986 on the proclamation of state of emergency with respect to a part of the Republic was abolished. The Committee requests the Government to supply a copy of the law abolishing the state of emergency with its next report.