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

Repetition

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for the expression of views opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee notes that section 342 of the Penal Code states that the insult of a public official during the discharge of their official duties, or in connection with this discharge, shall be punishable by a fine of 50 to 100 minimum monthly wages or to imprisonment of a term of up to six months (which involves the obligation to perform work). The Committee recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour (including compulsory prison labour) as a punishment for holding or expressing political views. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that section 342 of the Penal Code is amended or repealed so as to ensure that no prison sentence entailing compulsory labour can be imposed on persons who, without using or advocating violence, express certain political views or opposition to the established political, social or economic system. Pending the adoption of such an amendment, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of section 342 of the Penal Code, in its next report.

Article 1(c). Penal sanctions applicable to public officials. The Committee previously noted that pursuant to section 316(1) of the Penal Code (“Negligence”), the non-performance or improper performance by an official of his/her duties as the result of a negligent attitude, causing substantial harm to legitimate rights and interests of persons or organizations, or to state interests, is punishable by arrest (which involves deprivation of freedom and an obligation to perform labour). The Committee once again requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the application in practice of section 316(1) of the Penal Code, including copies of court decisions which could define or illustrate its scope, in order to enable the Committee to ascertain whether this provision is not used as a means of labour discipline within the meaning of the Convention.