CMNT_TITLE

Article 1(a) of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the provisions of Act No. 60-12 of 30 June 1962 on the freedom of the press provides for imprisonment involving compulsory labour for various acts or activities related to the exercise of the right of expression. The Committee referred in this connection to the following provisions: section 8 (deposit of a publication with the authorities before its circulation to the public); section 12 (allowing a ban on publications of foreign origin in French or in the vernacular printed in or outside the country); section 20 (incitement to commit an act classified as an offence); section 23 (causing offence to the Prime Minister); section 25 (publishing false reports); and sections 26 and 27 (slander and insults).

The Committee expressed the hope that the new Act on freedom of information, to which the Government had referred in its report, would be adopted promptly and would guarantee that no term of imprisonment involving compulsory labour could be imposed as a penalty for activities related to the exercise of the right of expression.

The Committee noted the adoption of Act No. 97-010 of 20 August 1997, liberalizing audiovisual communications and establishing special penal provisions relating to offences in the area of the press and audiovisual communications, provided by the Government, and the Government’s indication that the new Act does not repeal Act No. 60-12, but that in the event of conflicting provisions, those of Act No. 97-010 prevail.

The Committee observed that the provisions of the new Act did not eliminate the divergences between the national legislation and the Convention, since the scope of the new Act covered audiovisual communications but not "printing, sales of books and periodicals", which fall within the scope of Act No. 60-12 of 30 June 1960. The Committee regretted that some provisions of the new Act were similar to those of Act No. 60-12. It noted that, under section 79 of Act No. 97-010, "any seditious shouts or chants against the lawfully established authorities in public places or meetings" are punishable by a sentence of imprisonment of from six months to two years, and that causing offence to the President of the Republic is punishable by imprisonment of from one to five years, under section 81; section 80 punishes by imprisonment of from two to five years any provocation of the public security forces aimed at distracting them from their duty of defending security and obeying the orders given by their chiefs for the enforcement of military laws and regulations. Section 67 of Decree No. 73-293 of 15 December 1973 establishing the prison regulations allows convicts to be assigned to social rehabilitation work.

The Committee asked the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure observance of the Convention and to provide all relevant information on the application in practice of the abovementioned provisions of Acts Nos. 60-12 and 97-010, together with copies of any court decisions clarifying their scope.

The Committee notes that in its report the Government indicates that, in the second phase of the ILO’s programme to support implementation of fundamental principles and rights at work, the texts to apply the fundamental Conventions, including Convention No. 105, are to be compiled and edited, and that the Committee’s observations will be studied in this context with a view to harmonizing domestic law with the provisions of the Convention.

The Committee hopes that the Government will be in a position to provide information in its next report on the measures taken to ensure that national law and practice are brought into line with the Convention.

Article 1(c). In its previous comments the Committee noted that under sections 215, 235 and 238 of the Merchant Shipping Code of 1968, certain breaches of discipline by seafarers were punishable by imprisonment involving compulsory labour. In its last report the Government states that the draft Merchant Shipping Code has not yet been adopted.

The Committee hopes that the new Code will ensure application of the Convention in this respect and asks the Government to provide a copy of it as soon as it is enacted.

Article 1(d). The Committee noted the comments on the application of the Convention made by the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions of Benin, dated 31 May 2000, which were forwarded by the Government.  The trade union organizations stated that the requisition procedure, as set out in Ordinance No. 69-14, constitutes forced labour and that the provisions of this Ordinance are in breach of international and constitutional provisions concerning the right to strike.

In its observations on the application of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), the Committee has referred for many years to the provisions of the abovementioned Ordinance which allow workers on strike to be requisitioned under penalty of imprisonment.

The Committee notes with interest that, according to the Government’s statement in its reports on Conventions Nos. 29 and 105, an Act on the exercise of the right to strike has just been adopted and will be promulgated by the President of the Republic very shortly. The new Act repeals all the provisions of Ordinance No. 69-14/MFPRAT of 19 June 1969.

The Committee asks the Government to provide a copy of the Act on the exercise of the right to strike as soon as it has been promulgated.