Observation (CEACR) - adoptée 1992, publiée 79ème session CIT (1992)

1. In the comments that it has been making for many years, the Committee has referred to the provisions of section 1 of Act No. 20 of 1962 under which, among other provisions, certain women seriously suspected or accused of certain offences against morality may be interned for a period of from six months to three years. The Committee has also referred to section 6 of the Royal Decree of 5 October 1955 concerning vagabonds and suspects, under which any person who has already been sentenced for certain offences or been the subject of repeated investigations for the same offences and is again suspected of such offences is liable to detention of from one to five years by decision of a judge. The Committee understands that in both cases the persons concerned, who are merely suspected or accused, and detained by decision of a judge, are obliged to work.

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report, and in particular the reports of the national committee set up to examine international labour Conventions and Recommendations, which considers that there is no disparity between the above texts and the Convention.

As the Committee pointed out in paragraphs 89 to 93 of its 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour, it follows from Article 2, paragraph 2(c), of the Convention that compulsory labour imposed as correction or punishment falls outside the scope of the Convention only if certain conditions are met; first of all, the labour must be imposed "as a consequence of a conviction". Therefore, persons who are in detention but have not been convicted - such as prisoners awaiting trial or persons detained without trial - should not be obliged to perform labour. Furthermore, the term "conviction" indicates that the person concerned must have been found guilty of an offence. In the absence of such a finding of guilt, compulsory labour may not be imposed, even as a result of a decision by a court of law. Accordingly, the above provisions of the Act of 1962 and the Royal Decree of 1955 are contrary to the Convention.

2. The Committee has observed for several years that the Government's report contains no information in reply to the general direct request of 1981, in which the Committee referred to paragraphs 67 to 73 of its 1979 General Survey, concerning restrictions on the freedom of workers to leave their employment. It observed that, in a number of countries, the conditions of service for certain persons in the service of the State, particularly career members of the armed forces, are governed by legal provisions that make the right to leave the service dependent upon authorisation. In certain cases, a link is established between the duration of training received and that of the services normally required before resignation is accepted. Since such restrictions may have a bearing on the application of the Convention concerning forced or compulsory labour, the Committee again asks the Government to provide information on national law and practice concerning the situation of the various classes of persons in the service of the State, particularly in respect of their freedom to leave the service on their own initiative within a reasonable period, either at specified intervals or with previous notice.