Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2008, publiée 98ème session CIT (2009)

Communication of texts. The Committee has noted the Broadcasting Act, No. 4 of 1999, and the Electronic Communications Act, No. 36 of 2005, annexed to the Government’s report. It again requests the Government to supply copies of the provisions governing the press, public assemblies, meetings and demonstrations, so that the Committee could ascertain their conformity with the Convention.

Article 1(c) and (d) of the Convention. Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that penalties of imprisonment (involving an obligation to perform labour, under section 37(1)(b) of the Correctional Services Act, 1998) may be imposed on a seafarer under the following provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1951, as amended:

–      under section 174(2)(c), read in conjunction with section 313(2), if a seafarer is guilty of continued wilful disobedience to lawful commands or continued wilful neglect of duty;

–      under section 174(2)(d), read in conjunction with section 313(2), if a seafarer combines with any of the crew to disobey lawful commands, or to neglect duty, or to impede the navigation of the ship or retard the progress of the voyage.

Sections 321 and 180(2)(b) of the Merchant Shipping Act provide for the forcible conveyance of seafarers on board ship to perform their duties.

The Committee pointed out that only sanctions relating to acts that are likely to endanger the safety of the ship or the life or health of persons do not come within the scope of the Convention (see also the explanations contained in paragraphs 179 and 180 of the Committee’s General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour). The Committee observed that provisions of section 174(2)(c) and (d) are not limited to acts or omissions leading to the immediate loss, destruction or serious damage of the ship, or endangering the life of or causing injury to persons on board. On the contrary, section 174(2)(c) and (d) provides for the imposition of sanctions involving compulsory labour as a means of labour discipline (and possibly as a punishment for having participated in strikes) and is thus incompatible with Article 1(c) (and, in so far as applicable in case of strikes, to Article 1(d)) of the Convention.

As regards provisions of sections 321 and 180(2)(b) concerning forcible conveyance of seafarers on board ship to perform their duties, the Committee pointed out that measures to ensure the due performance by a worker of his service under compulsion of law (in the form of physical constraint or the menace of a penalty) constitute forced or compulsory labour as a means of labour discipline and are thus incompatible with the Convention (see also the explanations contained in paragraph 171 of the abovementioned General Survey on the eradication of forced labour).

The Committee has noted the Government’s indication in the report that Chapter 4 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1951, is being reviewed in the light of the issues raised under Article 1(c) and (d) of the Convention. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the necessary measures will soon be taken to bring the above provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act into conformity with the Convention and that the Government will supply, in its next report, information on the progress made in this regard.