Observation (CEACR) - adoptée 2009, publiée 99ème session CIT (2010)

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Imposition of sentences of imprisonment involving the obligation to work as punishment for expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. In the comments that it has been making for many years, the Committee has drawn the Government’s attention to certain provisions of the Penal Code and of Act No. 90-53 of 19 December 1990 on freedom of association, which provide for sentences of imprisonment involving the obligation to work in situations covered by these provisions of the Convention.

The Committee noted in its previous comments that the Penal Code, as amended by Act No. 90-61 of 19 December 1990, no longer exempts from the obligation to work persons sentenced to imprisonment for political offences or crimes. Under section 24 of the Penal Code and section 49 of Decree No. 92-052 establishing the prison regime, sentences of imprisonment involve the obligation to work. The Committee emphasized that where an individual is, in any manner whatsoever, compelled to perform prison labour as punishment for expressing certain political views or opposition to the established political, social or economic system, this falls within the scope of the Convention. Penalties of imprisonment that involve compulsory labour are covered by the Convention when imposed as punishment for the expression of views or opposition. To enable the Committee to ascertain that the application of the provisions mentioned below is restricted to activities falling outside the protection of the Convention, it requested the Government to provide all available information on their application in practice, including copies of court decisions handed down under these provisions which define or illustrate their scope. The Committee referred to the following provisions:

–           section 113 of the Penal Code, under which the issuing or propagation of false information liable to injure the public authorities or national unity is punishable by a prison term of from three months to three years;

–           section 154(2) of the Penal Code, under which incitement, whether in speech or in writings intended for the public, to revolt against the Government and the institutions of the Republic, is punishable by imprisonment of from three months to three years;

–           section 157(1)(a) of the Penal Code, under which incitement to obstruction of the execution of any law, regulation or lawfully issued order of the public authority is punishable by imprisonment of from three months to four years;

–           section 33(1) and (3) of Act No. 90-53 on freedom of association, which provides for a sentence of imprisonment from three months to one year for board members or founders of an association which continues operations or which is re-established unlawfully after a judgement or decision has been issued for its dissolution, and for persons who have encouraged the assembly of members of the dissolved association by allowing continued use of the association’s premises. Section 4 of the Act declares null and void associations founded in support of a cause or in view of a purpose contrary to the Constitution, and associations whose purpose is to undermine, inter alia, security, territorial integrity, national unity, national integration or the republican nature of the State. Furthermore, section 14 provides that the dissolution of an association does not bar any legal proceedings from being instituted against the officials of such an association.

The Committee notes that, in its last report received in September 2008, the Government indicates that it has not been notified of court rulings issued in relation to offences relating to the expression of opinions and adds that these cases are likely to be rare, or non-existent, in view of the multipartite system that has been in force in Cameroon for over 18 years, and the system of trade union pluralism. While taking due note of this information, the Committee emphasizes the need to examine the manner in which the above provisions are applied in practice. In the absence of any information on this subject, the Committee is bound once again to draw the Government’s attention to the fact that these provisions may give rise to violations of the Convention if they provide the basis for convictions to sentences of imprisonment as punishment for persons who express a political view or ideological opposition to the established political, social or economic system, without having recourse to or calling for violent methods.

In view of the explanations provided above, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information in its next report on the judicial decisions handed down under the above provisions of the Penal Code and the Act on freedom of association (number of convictions and copies of the court decisions) that illustrate their scope. It once again requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that, in accordance with Article 1(a) of the Convention, the persons protected by the Convention may not be subjected to penalties involving an obligation to work.

Article 1(c) and (d). Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report to the effect that, with reference to the disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers, the provisions of the new Merchant Shipping Code of the Economic and Monetary Community of Central Africa (CEMAC) apply. It notes that section 554 of the Code, respecting the penalties applicable for faults relating to disciplinary matters, does not provide for sentences of imprisonment, as the penalties incurred for the most serious faults are dismissal and removal from the national seafarers’ register. Under the terms of section 607 of the Code, it replaces the Merchant Shipping Code of Custom and Economic Union of Central Africa (UDEAC) of 22 December 1994 and repeals any previous provisions that are contrary to it. The Committee understands that these provisions apply, inter alia, to Ordinance No. 62/DF/30 of 1962, on which it commented previously. The Committee notes that under the new provisions, breaches of labour discipline committed by seafarers are no longer punishable by sentences of imprisonment involving the obligation to work.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.