ILO-en-strap
NORMLEX
Information System on International Labour Standards
NORMLEX Page d'accueil > Profils par pays >  > Commentaires

Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 1991, publiée 78ème session CIT (1991)

Convention (n° 105) sur l'abolition du travail forcé, 1957 - Philippines (Ratification: 1960)

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report.

The Committee had noted that under section 1727 of the Revised Administrative Code all convicted able-bodied male prisoners not over 60 years of age may be compelled to work in and about prisons, jails, public buildings, grounds, roads and other public works of the national Government, provinces or municipalities; that persons detained under civil process or confined for contempt of court and persons detained pending determination of their appeals may be compelled to police their cells and to perform such other labour as may be deemed necessary for hygienic or sanitary reasons. It appears that the prison labour, in general, is not limited to clearing cells for the purpose of maintaining the hygiene and sanitary conditions.

The Committee notes the Government's declaration in its report that section 1727 is not and should not be considered as a penalty nor be interpreted as in violation with the Convention. Furthermore under the Revised Penal Code hard or forced labour can neither be imposed nor is it imposable.

The Committee refers again to paragraphs 102 to 109 of its 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour in which it states that labour imposed on persons as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law will in most cases have no relevance to the application of the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, but that, on the other hand any form of compulsory labour, including prison labour, is covered by the 1957 Convention if it is imposed in any of the five cases specified by the Convention. While prison labour exacted from common offenders is intended to reform or rehabilitate them, the same need does not arise in the case of persons convicted for their opinions or for having taken part in a strike.

The Committee hopes that the Government will indicate measures taken or envisaged to lay down that imprisonment involving an obligation to perform labour, cannot be imposed on persons who hold or express certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system or have participated in a strike.

Article 1(a) of the Convention

1. In its previous comments the Committee referred to article 142-B of the Revised Penal Code (inserted by Presidential Decree No. 1834 of 1981) and to Article 146 of the same Code (as revised by the same Decree) under which the use of certain press facilities or meetings could be considered as propaganda to destabilise the Government or erode the faith and loyalty of citizens thereto and was punishable by imprisonment (involving under section 1727 of the Revised Administrative Code an obligation to perform labour).

The Committee notes the text of the Executive Order No. 187 of June 1987 communicated by the Government with its report under which Presidential Decree No. 1834 and article 142-B were repealed and articles 142 and 146 were restored. The Committee notes the texts of articles 142 and 154 of the Revised Penal Code as communicated by the Government with its report. Under section 142 a penalty of imprisonment may be imposed upon persons who incite others by means of speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems, to acts constituting sedition, who utter seditious words or speeches, who write, publish, or circulate scurrilous libels against the Government. Under section 154(1) a penalty of imprisonment may be imposed on any person who by means of printing, lithography or any other means of publication shall maliciously publish as news any false news which may endanger the public order or cause damage to the interests or credit of the State.

The Committee recalls that the Convention prohibits the use of any form of forced or compulsory labour as a means of political coercion or education or as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system.

The Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the persons protected by the Convention may not be punished by penalties involving, under section 1727 of the Revised Administrative Code, an obligation to work. The Committee furthermore requests the Government to provide information on the practical application of the above-mentioned provisions, including the number of convictions thereunder and copies of recent judicial decisions defining or illustrating their scope.

2. The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the practical application of Presidential Decree No. 33 (on printing, possession and circulation of certain leaflets, handbills and propaganda material) if this Decree is still in force or a copy of any repealing legislation.

Article 1(d)

3. In its previous comments the Committee referred to the provisions of sections 263(g) and 264 of the Labour Code under which the Minister of Labour could assume jurisdiction over a labour dispute or refer it to compulsory arbitration considering that such a dispute affected the national interest, section 263 empowering the President to determine the industries affecting in his opinion the national interest. No strike could be declared after such assumption of jurisdiction or submission to arbitration and violation of the prohibition to strike could be punished by imprisonment, involving compulsory labour.

The Committee, while noting that the above-mentioned provisions of section 263(g) and 264 have been amended by Act No. 6715 of 25 July 1988, observes however that the substance of these provisions has been retained in the new Act. Under section 263(g), as amended, where in his opinion a labour dispute causes or is likely to cause a strike in an industry indispensable to the national interest, the Secretary of Labour and Employment may assume jurisdiction over the dispute and decide it or certify it to the National Labour Relations Commission; such certification has the effect of automatically enjoining the intended or impending strike and workers must return immediately to work. Furthermore the President may determine the industries which in his opinion are indispensable to the national interest and may intervene at any time and assume jurisdiction over any labour dispute in such industries. Under section 264, the declaration of a strike after assumption of jurisdiction or submission to compulsory arbitration is prohibited. The Committee notes that penalties for engaging in illegal strikes have been strengthened since under the new section 272(a) any person who has engaged in an illegal strike may be punished by imprisonment the minimum length of which has been increased from one day to three months and the maximum from six months to three years (involving under section 1727 of the Revised Administrative Code an obligation to perform labour).

The Committee refers again to paragraph 123 of its 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour, where it indicated that the imposition of penalties (even if involving an obligation to perform labour) for participation in strikes in essential services would not be incompatible with the Convention, provided that such provisions are applicable only to essential services in the strict sense of the term, that is to say services whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee regrets that on the occasion of the modification of the Labour Code the necessary measures have not been adopted to restrict the imposition of any sanctions of imprisonment, to strikes in essential services in the strict sense of the term and that, on the contrary, such sanctions have been aggravated.

The Committee expresses the hope that the Government will indicate the measures taken to bring legislation into conformity with the Convention on this point.

4. Referring to its previous direct request, the Committee has noted the information provided by the Government relating to the detention of political prisoners during the previous regime as well as the provisions governing rallies, meetings and other political activities during the election campaign as contained in the Omnibus Election Code, 1985.

© Copyright and permissions 1996-2024 International Labour Organization (ILO) | Privacy policy | Disclaimer