Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2021, publiée 110ème session CIT (2022)

Convention (n° 105) sur l'abolition du travail forcé, 1957 - Algérie (Ratification: 1969)

Autre commentaire sur C105

Observation

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Imprisonment involving compulsory labour as a penalty for expressing political views or opposition to the established political, social or economic system. 1. Ordinance implementing the Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation. The Committee notes that section 46 of Ordinance No. 06-01 of 27 February 2006 implementing the Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation establishes a penalty of three to five years’ imprisonment and a fine for any person who, through their statements, writings or any other action, uses or exploits the wounds of the national tragedy to attack the institutions of the People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria, to weaken the State, to dishonour its officers who have served it with dignity, or to tarnish the image of Algeria at the international level. The Committee notes that under the legislation in force prison labour may be imposed further to a conviction resulting in imprisonment (section 2 of the Inter-Ministerial Order of 26 June 1983 establishing arrangements for the use of prison labour by the National Office of Educational Works and section 96 of Act No. 05-04 of 6 February 2005 establishing the Prison Code and regulations on the social reintegration of prisoners). Furthermore, the Committee notes that the United Nations Human Rights Committee, in its concluding observations of 2018, expressed concern at reports of the use or threat of use of section 46 referred to above (CCPR/C/DZA/CO/4, paragraph 13). In order to be able to evaluate the range and scope of application of section 46 of Ordinance No. 06-01 of 27 February 2006, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which it is used and applied in practice, indicating the number of judicial proceedings instituted on this basis, the nature of the penalties imposed and the facts on which the convictions are based.

2. Penal Code. The Committee notes that certain activities defined as criminal offences in the Penal Code may incur the penalty of imprisonment (with the possible imposition of prison labour) under circumstances which may come within the scope of Article 1(a) of the Convention. These offences are defined in the following provisions of the Penal Code:

■ section 95: receipt of propaganda funds of foreign origin and involvement in political propaganda;
■ section 95bis (introduced into the Penal Code by Act No. 20-06 of 28 April 2020): receipt of funds, gifts or advantages for the purpose of performing or inciting to perform acts likely to undermine the fundamental interests of Algeria or public security and order;
■ section 96: distribution, putting on sale, public display or possession of publications capable of harming the national interest;
■ section 98: participation in an unarmed gathering;
■ section 100: incitement to participate in an unarmed gathering;
■ section 144: insulting a judge, civil servant, public official, or law enforcement commander or officer (the applicable penalties have been made more severe by Act No. 20-06 of 28 April 2020);
■ section 144bis(2): insulting the prophet and envoys of God, and denigration of the dogma and precepts of Islam;
■ section 196bis (introduced into the Penal Code by Act No. 20-06 of 28 April 2020): dissemination or spreading of false information, likely to undermine security or public order;
■ section 298: defamation;
■ section 299: expression of abuse;
■ section 440: insulting any citizen responsible for a public service ministry.

The Committee notes that the Human Rights Committee, in its concluding observations of 2018, expressed concern at reports of the use of sections 96 (publications capable of harming the national interest), 144 (insults), 144bis(2) (insults against the prophet) and 298 (defamation) to impede the work of journalists and human rights defenders (CCPR/C/DZA/CO/4, paragraph 43). Moreover, the Committee notes that the spokesperson of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, in a press release of 11 May 2021, expressed growing concern at the situation in Algeria, where the rights of freedom of opinion and expression, and freedom of peaceful assembly and participation in public affairs continue to be attacked. The press release emphasizes that during the last two months activists, human rights defenders, students, journalists, bloggers and ordinary citizens peacefully expressing their disagreement have continued to be the subject of criminal prosecutions. In a press release dated 5 March 2021, the spokesperson of the High Commissioner for Human Rights emphasized the fact that in 2019-20 at least 2,500 people were arrested or detained in connection with their peaceful activism. Furthermore, in a press release of 16 September 2020, United Nations human rights experts condemned the handing down of a two-year prison sentence for an Algerian journalist and rights defender, on the basis of accusations officially described as “incitement to illegal assembly and endangering national unity”, for filming police officers who were attacking demonstrators in Algiers.

The Committee recalls that, under the terms of Article 1(a) of the Convention, no penalty involving compulsory labour may be imposed on persons for holding or expressing political views or for peacefully expressing their ideological opposition to the established political, social or economic system. In this regard, the Committee refers to the developments described in its observation and reiterates that the activities which, under Article 1(a) of the Convention, must not be subject to any penalty involving compulsory labour include those undertaken in the context of the freedom to express political or ideological views (orally, in the press or by other means of communication), and also in the context of the rights of association and of assembly, whereby citizens seek the dissemination and acceptance of their views. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which the judicial authorities make use of the sections of the Penal Code referred to above, indicating the frequency with which these provisions are invoked, the facts which have given rise to convictions, and the nature of the penalties imposed.

3. Definition of terrorism. The Committee previously noted that, under section 87bis of the Penal Code, a “terrorist or subversive act” includes any act which undermines the security of the State, the integrity of the territory, or the stability and normal functioning of institutions, including obstruction of traffic or freedom of movement on thoroughfares and occupying public places with gatherings; damaging means of communication and transport, and public and private property, taking possession thereof or unduly occupying it; obstructing the actions of the public authorities or the free exercise of worship or of public freedoms and also the functioning of public service establishments; and hindering the operation of public institutions. The Committee noted that the abovementioned acts are liable to imprisonment, including the possibility of compulsory labour. The Committee emphasized that where anti-terrorist legislation is couched in vague and general terms, it may have an impact on freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and freedom of association, and the Committee therefore asked the Government to provide information on the application in practice of section 87bis of the Penal Code.

The Government indicates that the requisite conditions for applying section 87bis of the Penal Code include the fact that these acts must be directed against the security of the State, must create terror and insecurity among the population and in particular must obstruct the functioning of public institutions or endanger human life or property. The Government explains that there are consequently no grounds for applying the provisions of section 87bis in cases involving the peaceful expression of opinions, either by workers or by any other persons. The Committee duly notes this information. In addition, it observes that the Human Rights Committee, in its concluding observations of 2018, reported allegations of undue recourse to anti-terrorist provisions against human rights defenders or journalists (CCPR/C/DZA/CO/4, paragraph 17). The Committee therefore requests the Government to continue to ensure that the scope of application of section 87bis of the Penal Code is interpreted in the manner indicated by the Government, so that these provisions are not used to impose imprisonment, including the possibility of compulsory labour, on persons who peacefully express opposition to the established political, social or economic system.