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

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

Convention (n° 105) sur l'abolition du travail forcé, 1957 - Saint-Vincent-et-les Grenadines (Ratification: 1998)

Autre commentaire sur C105

Observation
  1. 2009

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

Article 1, subparagraph a, of the Convention. Penal sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views.In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to the following legislative provisions, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving an obligation to perform labour, under the Prisons Ordinance) may be imposed in circumstances covered by the Convention:

–           section 3(1), read in conjunction with section 17(2), of the Public Order Ordinance (wearing in any public meeting, without permission of the chief of police, a uniform signifying association with any political organization or with the promotion of any political object); and

–           section 15, read in conjunction with section 17(2), of the Public Order Ordinance (use of threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour in a public place or at a public meeting, with the intent to provoke a breach of peace).

The Committee recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. Referring also to the explanations provided in paragraphs
152–166 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour, the Committee points out that the Convention does not prohibit punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence, incite violence or engage in preparatory acts aimed at violence. But sanctions involving compulsory labour fall within the scope of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the peaceful expression of views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system, whether such prohibition is imposed by law or by a discretionary administrative decision.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in the report that section 3(1) of the Public Order Ordinance, while it remains in effect, is obsolete and no one in recent times has been prosecuted for its violation.

While noting this indication, the Committee hopes that measures will be taken, on the occasion of the future revision of the legislation, to formally repeal section 3(1) of the Public Order Ordinance, in order to bring legislation into conformity with the Convention and the indicated practice. It also requests the Government once again to supply information on the application in practice of section 15 of the Public Order Ordinance referred to above, including any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope, in order to enable the Committee to ascertain that it is applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

Noting also the Government’s indication in the report that the provision of section 17(2) of the Public Order Ordinance referred to above is now laid down in section 18(2), the Committee requests the Government to communicate, with its next report, a copy of the revised text of the Public Order Ordinance (Cap. 283).

Please also supply a copy of the full updated text of the Societies Act (Cap. 330).

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