CMNT_TITLE

Repetition

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Penal sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views. Political Parties Act. The Committee previously noted that pursuant to section 95(3) and section 120 of the Organic Law on Political Parties BE 2550, a penalty of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed for using the name, initials or emblem of a political party that has been dissolved by the Constitutional Court, for political activities or to receive any benefit. Pursuant to section 97 and section 120 of the Law, penalties of imprisonment may also be imposed on a person who was previously a member of the Executive Committee of the dissolved political party who, within a period of five years from the date of the dissolution, applies for the formation of a new political party, becomes a member of an Executive Committee of a political party, or promotes a new political party. Section 94 of the Law states that the Constitutional Court may issue an order to dissolve a political party if it has committed one of five acts, including “an act which may be harmful to the democratic regime of the Government with the King as Head of State under the Constitution” (section 94(3)) and “an act, either inside or outside the Kingdom, which may endanger the security of the State, or be contrary to the law, public order, or good morals” (section 94(4)).

The Committee once again 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. With reference to paragraph 307 of its 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, the Committee recalls that the prohibition to express political views as a consequence of the prohibition of political parties or associations (subject to penalties involving compulsory labour) is incompatible with Article 1(a) of the Convention. Noting an absence of information on this point in the Government’s report, the Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to bring the abovementioned provisions of the Organic Law on Political Parties BE 2550 (2007), into conformity with the Convention, to ensure that no penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed for the holding or expression of political views. Pending the adoption of such amendments, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of the Organic Law on Political Parties, particularly whether any political parties have been dissolved by order of the Constitutional Court (pursuant to section 94) and whether any penalties of imprisonment have been imposed pursuant to this Act.

Article 1(c) and (d). Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a means of labour discipline and for participation in strikes. The Labour Relations Act and the State Enterprise Labour Relations Act. The Committee previously noted that pursuant to sections 131–133 of the Labour Relations Act BE 2518 (1975), penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed on any employee who violates or fails to comply with an agreement on terms of employment or a decision on a labour dispute under sections 18, 22–24, 29 and 35(4) of the Act. The Committee observed that such provisions were contrary to the provisions of the Convention in providing for sanctions involving compulsory labour as a means of labour discipline. The Committee also noted that both the Labour Relations Act and the State Enterprise Labour Relations Act BE 2543 (2000) (SELRA) contain provisions permitting the imposition of penalties of imprisonment for participation in strikes. Pursuant to the Labour Relations Act, penalties of imprisonment may be imposed if: (i) the minister orders the strikers to return to work, being of the opinion that the strike may affect the national economy or cause hardship to the public or endanger national security or be contrary to public order (section 140 read in conjunction with section 35(2)); and (ii) the matter is awaiting the decision of the Labour Relations Committee, or a decision has been given by the minister or the Labour Relations Committee (pursuant to section 139 read in conjunction with section 34(5)). The SELRA prohibits strikes in state enterprises (section 33), and a violation of this prohibition is punishable with imprisonment for a term of up to one year.

The Committee noted the Government’s statement that it has made progress with regard to repealing sections 131–133 and sections 139 and 140 of the Labour Relations Act, as well as repealing sections 33 and 77 of the SELRA. The Government indicates that the Department of Labour Protection and Welfare, under the Ministry of Labour, is responsible for this task, and a draft amendment has been developed that does not contain penalties of imprisonment. This draft has been submitted to the Office of the Council of State for its consideration, and the process to amend the Labour Relations Act will resume when Parliament is reconvened. The Committee noted the statement of the NCTL, indicating that it supports the repeal of these penalties of imprisonment under the SELRA and the Labour Relations Act, and requesting the Government to submit draft amendments to Parliament the next time it sits. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the draft revision of the Labour Relations Act, repealing sections 131–133 and sections 139 and 140, and the draft revision of the SELRA, repealing sections 33 and 37, are adopted in the near future, to ensure that sanctions of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) cannot be imposed as a means of labour discipline or for the peaceful participation in a strike. It requests the Government to continue to provide information on progress made in this regard, in its next report.

Article 1(d). Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for having participated in strikes. Criminal Code. For a number of years the Committee has been referring to section 117 of the Criminal Code, under which participation in any strike with the purpose of changing the laws of the State, coercing the Government or intimidating the people is punishable with imprisonment (involving compulsory labour). It previously noted the Government’s indication that this section had not been applied in practice.

The Committee once again noted the Government’s statement that, while acknowledging the Committee’s concerns, the elements of criminal liability in section 117 concern a strike, lockout or cessation of trade or business that aims to bring about a change in the laws of the country or coerce the Government to act in a way which would suspend its administration. The Government reiterated that this provision is not related to restrictions on freedom of association regarding social and economic benefits of workers in their work. Taking note of the Government’s statement, the Committee must once again recall that Article 1(d) of the Convention prohibits recourse to sanctions involving any form of compulsory labour “as a punishment for having participated in strikes”. In this connection, the Committee points out that organizations responsible for defending workers’ socio-economic and occupational interests should, in principle, be able to use strike action to support their position in the search for solutions to problems posed by major social and economic policy trends which have a direct impact on their members and on workers in general. Observing that the Committee has been raising this issue for over two decades, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to repeal section 117 of the Criminal Code, to ensure that no sanction of imprisonment involving compulsory labour may be imposed as a punishment for peaceful participation in strikes. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of section 117 of the Criminal Code, with its next report.