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

Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2020, publiée 109ème session CIT (2021)

Convention (n° 29) sur le travail forcé, 1930 - Türkiye (Ratification: 1998)

Autre commentaire sur C029

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report and the supplementary information provided in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020).
The Committee notes the observations of the Turkish Confederation of Employers’ Associations (TİSK) received on 29 September 2020.
Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention. Work of prisoners for private entities. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, according to section 20 of the Regulation on the administration and bidding of penitentiaries and work centres of detention institutions of 2005, detainees might be asked to work, but should not be obliged to do so. It also noted that, pursuant to this Regulation and the Regulation on administration of penitentiaries and execution of sentences of 2006, conditions of work of the prisoners might be considered as approximating those of a free labour relationship. The Government indicated that the Circular on Implementation of Work Centres No. 137/7 determined the conditions of work of prisoners. It also indicated that the Supreme Council of Prison Workshops ended the work of prisoners in private workplaces outside the prison workshops. A standard protocol is signed by the private enterprises and prison workshops regarding the work of the prisoners within the framework of vocational training and rehabilitation run by private enterprises inside the prison workshops. The Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that formal, freely given and informed consent was required for the work of prisoners within the framework of vocational training and rehabilitation run by private enterprises, with such consent being authenticated by conditions of work approximating those of a free labour relationship.
The Government indicates that, according to the Act on the Execution of Sentences and Security Measures No. 5275 and its corresponding regulations, prisoners, including those working within the framework of vocational training and rehabilitation carried out by private enterprises, are employed with a daily wage determined by the Supreme Council of Prison Work Places. The Government also indicates that they are partially insured, that they receive a dividend at the end of the year, that the subsistence fees received from all convicts after their release are not collected from those working in prison workplaces, and that working hours are determined. In addition, precautionary measures, including training, are taken against occupational accidents. Prisoners and convicted persons who do not work are eligible for internships at their request. The Committee takes due note of the information provided by the Government, but observes once again that the legislation does not appear to require the free, informed and formal consent of prisoners to work for private enterprises. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures without delay to include, in its legislation, provisions requiring prisoners who work for private entities, including in the framework of vocational training and rehabilitation, to give their written, freely given and informed consent to enter into such an employment relationship. It requests the Government to provide information in this regard.
Article 2(2)(d). Powers to call up labour in cases of emergency. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that services required from citizens during a state of emergency, which could be declared under Article 119 of the Constitution in the event of “serious economic crisis”, were exempt from the definition of forced labour. It noted the Government’s indication that, according to section 10(1) of the State of Emergency Act (No. 2935 of 1983), in the event of serious economic crises, the Council of Ministers might issue decrees to determine measures and obligations in relation to labour. However, the Government indicated that this section did not imply compulsory labour. The Committee further noted that section 8(1) of the State of Emergency Act provided that under the state of emergency declared due to a natural disaster or dangerous epidemic disease, all citizens between 18 and 60 years of age, who are resident within the region where the state of emergency is declared, were obliged to perform duties imposed on them. The Committee requested the Government to clarify the implication of “measures and obligations in relation to labour” under section 10(1) of the State of Emergency Act and to provide information on the application of the state of emergency in practice.
The Government indicates that Turkey has not resorted to extraordinary measures for economic reasons. The Committee takes note of the information provided within the framework of the application of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), according to which a state of emergency was declared in Turkey between July 2016 and July 2018 in the aftermath of a coup attempt. It also takes note that, in this context, the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) indicated that the Government continues to uphold state of emergency laws. While taking due note of the Government’s information, the Committee requests it to take the necessary measures to amend the legislation in order to remove the possibility of imposing work in situations of “serious economic crisis”, in conformity with Article 2(2)(d) of the Convention. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate whether the power to call up labour has been used during states of emergency declared under Article 119 of the Constitution, for example between July 2016 and July 2018 and, if so, to provide indications of the duration and extent of the services required from citizens.
Article 2(2)(e). Minor communal services. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the Village Affairs Act No. 442 of 1924 provided for “mandatory works for villagers”, including building and repairing roads and building bridges (section 13 of the Village Affairs Act). The Government indicated that the Village Affairs Act was outdated and that many provisions were not functional. It further indicated that the types of work listed in section 13 of the Village Affairs Act were now carried out by the Special Provincial Administrations and the Central Administration. The Committee therefore requested the Government to amend the Village Affairs Act in order to bring it into conformity with the Convention, and to provide information on the application in practice of section 13 by the Special Provincial Administrations and the Central Administration.
The Government indicates that no amendments have been made to the Village Affairs Act of 1924, and reiterates that a number of its provisions are now obsolete. The Committee therefore expresses the firm hope that the Village Affairs Act of 1924 will be amended, in line with the indicated practice, to ensure that “minor services” can only be performed in the direct interest of the community, and following consultation with the said community. In the meantime, it once again requests the Government to provide information on the work listed in section 13 of the Village Affairs Act which is carried out by the Special Provincial Administrations and the Central Administration.
Article 25. Penal sanctions for the exaction of forced or compulsory labour. The Committee previously noted that section 117(2) of the Penal Code prohibited the employment of homeless, helpless or dependant persons without payment or for substandard wages or to forcibly subject them to inhumane working and living conditions. It noted that, according to the Government’s information, the number of offences recorded decreased from 55 in 2013 to 19 in 2015, and the number of convictions increased. The Committee requested the Government to continue to provide information on the application in practice of section 117(2) of the Penal Code, including the specific penalties applied.
The Government indicates that, under section 117(2) of the Penal Code, seven cases resulted in acquittal in 2017, four cases in 2018, one case in 2019, and one case in the first half of 2020. In addition, the Committee notes the Government’s supplementary information that in the first half of 2020, one conviction was handed down under section 117(2) of the Penal Code. The Government further indicates that, between 2016 and 2019, seven cases of forced labour were registered, and 12 suspects were arrested. Recalling that, pursuant to Article 25 of the Convention, penalties for the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour shall be strictly enforced, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the offences of violation of freedom of work and labour under section 117(2) of the Penal Code are adequately punished. It requests the Government to continue to provide information on the practical application of section 117(2) of the Penal Code, including the number of investigations, prosecutions, convictions, acquittals and the specific penalties imposed. It also requests the Government to provide information on the convictions of the seven cases of forced labour registered between 2016 and 2019.
© Copyright and permissions 1996-2024 International Labour Organization (ILO) | Privacy policy | Disclaimer