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

Communication of repealing texts. The Committee previously noted the Government’s statement in its report that Decree No. 1669 of 13 May 1953 and Decree No. 1781 of 14 December 1953 (which permitted the imposition of corrective labour on workers by administrative decision), as well as Decree No. 747 of 30 December 1949 (concerning the exaction of labour for road works) had been repealed. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the Government will not fail to provide, with its next report, copies of the texts which have repealed the abovementioned Decrees Nos 747, 1669 and 1781.

Articles 1 (paragraph 1), 2 (paragraph 1), and 25 of the Convention. Trafficking in human beings. The Committee has noted the National Strategy on Combating Trafficking in Human Beings (Strategic Framework and National Action Plan for 2005–07), as well as the Cooperation Agreement to establish a National Referral Mechanism for the enhanced identification of and assistance to victims of human trafficking (2005), annexed to the Government’s report. The Committee has noted the Government’s indication that the National Strategy was under review and will be extended until 2012. The Committee would appreciate it if the Government would provide, in its next report, a copy of the revised National Strategy and the new National Action Plan, as well as information on the practical measures undertaken to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in human beings, supplying copies of the relevant reports and available statistics. Please also provide information on any legal proceedings which have been instituted under the Penal Code provisions punishing the offences related to trafficking, indicating the penalties imposed on perpetrators.

Articles 1 (paragraph 1), and 2 (paragraph 1). 1. Freedom of career military personnel to leave their service. The Committee previously noted that, under sections 24(4) and 25(3) of Law No. 9171 of 22 January 2004 on the military grades and careers in the armed forces, members of career military personnel may apply for resignation to a competent body; if no reply is given within three months, the application to resign is considered accepted. The Committee observed that it follows from the wording of the above sections that the application to resign may be either accepted or refused. It also noted that neither section 24 nor 25 of Law No. 9171 establishes the criterion used for deciding whether a resignation presented under these provisions will or will not be accepted.

The Committee recalls, referring also to the explanations provided in paragraphs 46 and 96 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour, that career members who have voluntarily engaged in the armed forces, should not be deprived of the right to leave the service in peacetime within a reasonable period, either at specified intervals, or with previous notice. The Committee therefore hopes that measures will be taken to amend the above provisions in order to ensure that career military officers and other career military personnel will enjoy the right to resign their commission in time of peace by giving notice of reasonable length. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee again requests the Government to indicate the criteria applied in accepting or rejecting a resignation presented in conformity with sections 24 and 25 of the abovementioned Law, as well as the number of cases in which such resignations were refused and the grounds for refusal.

2. Compulsory public works exacted under the menace of suspension of unemployment benefits. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to Act No. 7933 of 17 May 1995 on public works, as amended by Act No. 8104 of 28 March 1996, under which participation in such works had been made compulsory not only for members of families receiving financial assistance from the State, but also for all persons covered by unemployment benefits schemes, under the menace of suspension of the benefits in case of refusal to work. The Committee noted the Council of Ministers’ Decisions Nos 405 of 1998 and 758 of 2003 concerning the organization of such works, supplied by the Government with its report. While noting this information, the Committee again requests the Government to provide information on the existing unemployment insurance schemes, supplying copies of relevant texts and indicating, in particular, whether such schemes are contingent upon the recipients having worked or contributed to such schemes during some minimum period, and whether the length of time during which benefits are paid is linked to the length of time the persons concerned had worked. Please also provide information on the application of the above legislation on public works in practice, including copies of reports and other relevant documents.

Article 2, paragraph 2, subparagraph (c). Work of prisoners for private enterprises. The Committee previously noted that prisoners may work outside penitentiary institutions, in accordance with section 36 of Act No. 8328, of 16 April 1998, concerning the rights and treatment of prisoners, and section 81 of the General Prison Rules adopted by the Council of Ministers’ Decision No. 96 of 9 March 2000. As regards the prisoners’ obligation to perform labour, the Committee noted that, under section 80 of the General Prison Rules, convicts can be asked to work in accordance with their physical and psychological capacities; section 34 of Act No. 8328 on the rights and treatment of prisoners referred to above excludes from the obligation to work only disabled persons, pregnant women, persons who fulfilled conditions for retirement and other persons unable to perform labour due to health reasons. The Committee also noted that, under section 35 of Act No. 8328 and section 82 of the General Prison Rules, conditions of work of the prisoners should be assimilated to those of free workers and are covered by the Labour Code and social security legislation.

The Government indicates in its latest report that Act No. 8328 and the General Prison Rules referred to above are in the process of being revised with a view to providing that labour of prisoners is not compulsory. It also indicates that a new legislation on employment of inmates is under preparation.

The Committee requests the Government to keep the ILO informed about the progress made in the amendment of the legislation and hopes that the new legislation concerning prison labour will contain provisions ensuring that the work of prisoners for private enterprises can be performed only with their voluntary consent and in the conditions approximating a free labour relationship, as regards wage levels (leaving room for deductions and attachments), social security and occupational safety and health. The Committee refers in this connection to the explanations provided in paragraphs 59–60 and 114–120 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour. Pending the adoption of the new legislation, please continue to provide information on the conditions in which prison labour is carried out for private enterprises, indicating, in particular, whether the work of prisoners for such enterprises is subject to their formal consent. Please also supply sample copies of agreements concluded by penitentiary institutions with private users of prison labour, to which a reference is made in section 81 of the General Prison Rules.

Article 25. Penal sanctions for the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted the provision of section 110 of the Penal Code punishing the illegal deprivation of liberty with sentences of imprisonment. The Committee again requests the Government to indicate whether this penal provision is also applicable to cases of illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour and to supply copies of the relevant court decisions. Please also indicate other measures taken or envisaged to give effect to this Article of the Convention, which provides that “the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour shall be punishable as a penal offence” and “that the penalties imposed by law are really adequate and are strictly enforced”.