Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2007, publiée 97ème session CIT (2008)

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Freedom of career military servicemen to terminate their service. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that, according to section 31(2) of the Law on the Organization of the National Defence System and Military Service, 1998, the duration of a contract to be signed with officers who have graduated from the Lithuanian Military Academy is until they reach the age for their transfer to the reserve. Section 37 of the same Law stipulates that the Minister of National Defence may allow professional military servicemen to terminate their contract prior to expiration for valid reasons, and a serviceman who wilfully terminates the contract prior to expiration without the approval of the minister is considered absent without leave and dealt with in accordance with the law. The Committee observed that career military servicemen who have voluntarily entered into an engagement cannot be deprived of the right to leave the service in peacetime within a reasonable period, either at specified intervals, or with previous notice, subject to the conditions which may normally be required to ensure the continuity of the service.

The Committee has noted with interest the Government’s statement in its 2005 report that the provision of section 31(2) referred to above is going to be amended. The Government indicates that the Ministry of National Defence has formed a working group to draft amendments to the Law on the Organization of the National Defence System and Military Service, and this working group has already drafted amendments providing for the conclusion with servicemen of fixed-term professional military service contracts for a term not exceeding five years.

The Committee hopes that the above amendments to the Law on the Organization of the National Defence System and Military Service will be adopted in the near future and legislation will be brought into conformity with the Convention on this point. Pending the adoption of the amendments, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the application of the abovementioned section 37(2) in practice, indicating the number of applications for resignation accepted and refused, as well as the reasons for refusal.

Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention. Work of prisoners for private individuals, companies or associations. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted from the Government’s report that in the “open-type” institutions of correctional labour, convicts are allowed to work for private individuals or enterprises. The Government indicated, in particular, that the administration of Kybartai penitentiary establishment, which was the only “open-type” establishment of corrective labour in the country, was looking for job vacancies for convicts and concluded contracts with legal and natural persons, and that convicts were informed about such vacancies and employed with their consent.

The Committee recalled that Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention expressly prohibits that prisoners are hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations. The Committee previously pointed out that, in order to be compatible with the Convention, work by prisoners for private companies must be performed in conditions approximating a free employment relationship; this necessarily requires the formal consent of the persons concerned, as well as further guarantees and safeguards covering the essential elements of a free labour relationship, such as wages and social security, etc. The Committee also noted that, under section 125(1) of the code on the execution of penal sentences (Law No. IX-994 of 27 June 2002), the work of convicted prisoners is compulsory. It therefore requested the Government to indicate how the freely given consent of convicts to work for private employers is ensured.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement in its 2005 report that the practice of employment of convicts in private companies has discontinued and the Kybartai penitentiary establishment has been closed down. The Government further indicated in its 2005 and 2007 reports that, during the period from January 2005 to April 2007, only about 30 to 31.9 per cent of convicts have been employed, most of them in the state-owned enterprises belonging to the penitentiary system, and the rest of them in the correctional institutions proper.

While noting this information with interest, the Committee hopes that the Government will continue to provide, in its future reports, information concerning the employment of prisoners, both inside and outside prison premises, supplying copies of the relevant provisions. It also requests the Government to communicate a copy of the full text of the code on the execution of penal sentences referred to above.

Article 25. Penal sanctions for the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour. The Committee has noted that section 147-1 of the new Criminal Code, as amended on 23 June 2005, makes the illegal exaction of forced labour (including labour exacted in conditions of slavery or other inhuman conditions) punishable with various penal sanctions, including imprisonment for a term of up to eight years. The Committee has noted the Government’s indications in its 2005 and 2007 reports that no proceedings have been instituted under this section during the period of 2003–07. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide, in its future reports, information on the application of section 147-1 in practice, supplying sample copies of the relevant court decisions, if any. Please also provide information on any legal proceedings which have been instituted under the Criminal Code provisions punishing trafficking in persons for the purpose of exploitation, indicating the penalties imposed on perpetrators.