Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2018, publiée 108ème session CIT (2019)

Convention (n° 105) sur l'abolition du travail forcé, 1957 - Géorgie (Ratification: 1996)

Autre commentaire sur C105

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding the application in practice of sections 226 (concerning organization of group actions violating public order and participation in such actions) and 347 (violation of procedures related to the organization of meetings and manifestations, if the violation entails grave consequences caused by negligence) of the Criminal Code. According to this information, no cases under section 347 have been reviewed by the courts while with regard to the only case which was initiated under section 226 in 2013–15, the legal process is still ongoing in the Tbilisi court. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the final decision made by the court with regard to the pending case under section 226, as well as any other decisions made in relation to sections 226 and 347 of the Criminal Code.

Article 1(d). Penal sanctions involving compulsory labour for participating in strikes. The Committee previously noted that section 348 of the Criminal Code provides for sanctions of correctional work or limitation of freedom as a punishment for the violation of strike procedures by the organizers of strikes, if the violation entails grave consequences caused by negligence. It noted the Government’s repeated indication that the above section is applicable to cases of abuse of the right to strike, if such abuse has caused “serious damage”, which means any situation in which human life and health, natural environment or property are damaged. The Government also indicated that this section implicitly states that it cannot be applied to a peaceful strike.

The Committee once again notes the Government’s indication in its report that no court has ever discussed any case related to the application of section 348 of the Criminal Code.