CMNT_TITLE

Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) - Qatar (RATIFICATION: 1998)

Other comments on C029

Observation

Direct Request

DISPLAYINEnglish - French - SpanishAlle anzeigen

Complaint under article 26 of the ILO Constitution concerning non-observance of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), and the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81)

The Committee notes that at the 103rd Session of the International Labour Conference (ILC) in June 2014, 12 delegates to the ILC, under article 26 of the ILO Constitution filed a complaint against the Government of Qatar relating to the violation of Conventions Nos 29 and 81.

At its 322nd Session (November 2014), the Governing Body had before it a report by its Officers regarding the complaint. The complainants allege that the problem of forced labour affects the migrant worker population of roughly 1.5 million. From the moment migrant workers begin the process of seeking work in Qatar, they are drawn into a highly exploitative system that facilitates the exaction of forced labour by their employers. This includes practices such as contract substitution, recruitment fees (for which many take out large high interest loans) and passport confiscation. The Government of Qatar fails to maintain a legal framework sufficient to protect the rights of migrant workers consistent with international law and to enforce the legal protections that currently exist. Of particular concern, the sponsorship law, among the most restrictive in the Gulf region, facilitates the exaction of forced labour by, among other things, making it very difficult for a migrant worker to leave an abusive employer.

At its 323rd Session (March 2015), the Governing Body decided to request the Government to submit to the Governing Body for consideration at its 325th Session (November 2015), information on the action taken to address all the issues raised in the complaint. The Committee notes that, in light of the reports submitted by the Government, the Governing Body at its 325th Session (November 2015) decided to request the Government to receive a high-level tripartite visit, before the 326th Session (March 2016), to assess all the measures taken to address all the issues raised in the complaint, including the measures taken to effectively implement the newly adopted Law relating to the regulation of the entry and exit of expatriates and their residence. It also requested the Government to avail itself of ILO technical assistance to support an integrated approach to the annulment of the sponsorship system, the improvement of labour inspection and occupational safety and health systems, and giving a voice to workers. Finally, the Governing Body decided to defer further consideration on setting up a commission of inquiry until its 326th Session (March 2016).

Follow-up to the conclusions of the Committee on the Application of Standards (International Labour Conference, 104th Session, June 2015)

The Committee notes the Government’s report dated 4 September 2015, as well as the detailed discussion which took place at the 104th Session of the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in June 2015 concerning the application of the Convention by Qatar. It also notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), received on 1 September 2015.

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. Forced labour of migrant workers. The Committee previously noted that, at its 320th Session (March 2014), the Governing Body approved the report of the tripartite committee set up to examine the representation made by the ITUC and the Building and Wood Workers’ International (BWI) alleging non-observance of Convention No. 29 by Qatar. The tripartite committee concluded that certain migrants in the country might find themselves in situations of forced labour on account of a number of factors, such as contract substitution, restrictions on their freedom to leave their employment relationship or the country, the non-payment of wages and the threat of retaliation. The Governing Body adopted the tripartite committee’s conclusions and called upon the Government to:

-review without delay the functioning of the sponsorship system;
-ensure without delay access to justice for migrant workers, so that they can effectively assert their rights;
-ensure that adequate penalties are applied for violations.

(a) Functioning of the sponsorship system (kafala). In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that the recruitment of migrant workers and their employment is governed by Law No. 4 of 2009 regulating the sponsorship system. Under this system, migrant workers who have obtained a visa must have a sponsor. This sponsor must do all the necessary paperwork to obtain the residence permit for the worker and, once the procedures for this permit are completed, the employer is obliged to return the passport to the worker. The Law forbids workers to change employer, and the temporary transfer of the sponsorship is only possible if there is a pending lawsuit between the worker and the sponsor. Furthermore, workers may not leave the country temporarily or permanently unless they have an exit permit issued by the sponsor. If the sponsor refuses to grant the worker an exit visa, a special procedure is provided for under the Law. The Committee took due note of the Government’s indication that a bill has been drafted to repeal the system of sponsorship and to replace it by work contracts, and it expressed the hope that the new legislation on migrant workers would be drafted in such a way as to protect them against any form of exploitation, tantamount to forced labour.

The Committee notes that, in its conclusions adopted in June 2015, the Conference Committee urged the Government to abolish the kafala system and replace it with a work permit that allows the worker to change employer. It also urged the Government to work towards abolishing the exit permit system in the shortest possible time and, in the interim, to make exit permits available as a matter of right.

The Committee notes the ITUC’s statement that, although the Government has been promising to repeal the kafala system and replace it with a contract system for a long time, no progress has been made on the approval or implementation of such a new Law. Moreover, workers will still be tied to the employer for up to five years under the new Law. It is already theoretically possible to change employer in case of exploitation by petitioning the Government, but this happens extremely infrequently. Furthermore, as reported by the Government to the Governing Body, there is a proposed release permit under the new Law, but it is not clear under what circumstances that permit can be obtained. Moreover, while another proposal suggests that workers may obtain an exit visa and leave the country within 72 hours, the employer may object and prevent workers from leaving.

The Committee notes Law No. 21 of 27 October 2015, which regulates the entry and exit of expatriates and their residence, and which will enter into force one year from the date of its publication in the Official Gazette, that is, on 27 October 2016. The Committee notes that, by virtue of sections 8 and 9 of Law No. 21, the competent authority shall issue a residence permit to an expatriate worker, and it is the employer who is responsible for completing the procedures relating to the residence permit and for returning the passport or travel document to the expatriate worker, except upon the written request of the worker. Moreover, section 22 allows for the temporary transfer of an expatriate worker to another employer if there is a pending lawsuit between the worker and the employer (section 22(1)), or if there is evidence of abuse by the employer (section 22(2)). The Committee also notes that, pursuant to section 21(1), an expatriate worker may transfer to another employer before the end of the labour contract with the approval of the employer, the competent authority and the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs. The Committee notes that similar provisions already exist under Law No. 4 of 2009 regulating the sponsorship system. The Committee observes that the main new features of Law No. 21 consist of the following: (i) an expatriate worker may transfer to another employer immediately after the end of a contract of limited duration or after a period of five years if the contract is of unspecified duration (section 21(2)) without the employer’s consent, whereas, under Law No. 4 of 2009, the worker could not return to work in Qatar for two years in the event that the sponsor refuses such transfer; and (ii) an expatriate worker shall notify the competent authority at least three days prior to the departure date (section 7(1) of Law No. 21 of 2015) while under Law No. 4 of 2009, the exit permit had to be signed by the sponsor. The Committee nevertheless observes that, even under the new Law, the employer may object to the departure from the country of the expatriate worker, in which case the latter shall have the right to appeal to an Appeals Committee (section 7(2) and (3) of Law No. 21 of 2015). The Committee further notes that the requirement by the employer to reimburse the recruitment fees incurred by the worker by virtue of section 20 of Law No. 4 of 2009 appears not to have been taken on board in Law No. 21 of 2015.

The Committee notes with regret that, pursuant to Law No. 21 of 2015, employers will continue to play a significant role in regulating the departure of their employees, and that Law No. 21 does not seem to foresee termination by the expatriate worker before the expiry of the initial contract (that is, with a notice period) without the approval of the employer, nor does it set out reasons and conditions for termination generally, other than in a few very specific cases. The Committee also notes the absence of information in the Government’s report on the frequency of transfers to a new employer under Law No. 4 of 2009, or the number of cases of passport confiscation. The Committee considers that a number of provisions of the new Law, which still places restrictions on the possibility for migrant workers to leave the country or to change employer, prevent workers who might be victims of abusive practices from freeing themselves from these situations. This also applies to the practice of withholding passports, which deprives workers of their freedom of movement.

The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that Law No. 21 of 2015 is modified, as a matter of urgency, so as to provide migrant workers with the full enjoyment of their rights at work and to protect them from abusive practices and working conditions that may amount to forced labour, such as passport confiscation by employers, high recruitment fees, wage arrears and the problem of contract substitution. In this regard, the Committee expresses the firm hope that the legislation, once modified, will be applied effectively and will make it possible to:

-suppress the restrictions and obstacles that limit the freedom of movement of migrant workers and prevent them from terminating their employment relationship in the event of abuse;
-authorize workers to leave their employment at certain intervals or after having given reasonable notice (in this regard, the Government is requested to provide information on the number of employment transfers that take place in practice);
-review the procedure for issuing exit visas;
-effectively enforce the legal provisions on the prohibition of passport confiscation (in this regard, the Government is requested to provide information on the number of cases of passport confiscation detected in practice);
-ensure that recruitment fees are not charged to workers, or that they are reimbursed subsequently by the employer if this is the case;
-ensure that contracts signed in sending countries are not altered in Qatar.

The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the number of violations detected and penalties applied.

(b) Migrant domestic workers. The Committee previously requested the Government to indicate the legislative and practical measures taken to provide effective protection for domestic workers.

The Committee notes that, in its conclusions adopted in June 2015, the Conference Committee urged the Government to ensure that domestic workers have equal labour rights.

The Committee notes the ITUC’s observations that more than half of all women migrant workers in Qatar are employed in private homes. Migrant domestic workers are excluded from the legal frameworks which means that they are denied the protection provided to all other workers under the Qatar Labour Law and cannot lodge claims with the Labour Court or complain to the Ministry of Labour in the event that they are in an abusive or exploitative situation. The ITUC points out that abuse of domestic workers can involve physical and sexual abuse. Moreover, multiple investigations have revealed that migrant domestic workers are subject to forced labour conditions, with many having their passports confiscated and being denied wages, rest periods, annual and sick leave and freedom of movement.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, although migrant domestic workers are not covered by the Labour Law, they are protected by general provisions of the national legislation. The Government also states that there is a bill on domestic workers which is currently being examined by the competent legislative authorities in Qatar.

In this regard, the Committee recalls the importance of taking effective action to ensure that the system of employment of migrant domestic workers does not place the workers concerned in a situation of increased vulnerability, particularly when they are subjected to abusive employer practices, such as retention of passports, non-payment of wages, deprivation of liberty, and physical and sexual abuse. Such practices might cause their employment to be transformed into situations that could amount to forced labour. The Committee therefore urges the Government to take the necessary measures, in law and practice, to ensure that migrant domestic workers are fully protected from abusive practices and conditions that could amount to the exaction of forced labour. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the results of investigations into alleged force labour practices affecting migrant domestic workers, including their number, instances in which passports have been confiscated, wages denied and freedom of movement restricted. In this regard, the Committee expresses the firm hope that the draft bill on domestic workers will be in conformity with the provisions of the Convention and will be adopted in the very near future.

(c) Access to justice. The Committee previously noted that, although the legislation provides for the establishment of different complaints mechanisms, workers seemed to encounter certain difficulties in using them. The Committee also noted that the Labour Relations Department of the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs had been equipped with tablets to register complaints, available in several languages, and the number of interpreters had been increased. In addition, a free telephone line and email have been made available to workers so that they can lodge complaints, which are dealt with by a team specially trained for this task. Finally, an office had been set up within the court to help workers initiate legal proceedings and to assist them throughout the whole judicial process.

The Committee notes that, in its conclusions adopted in June 2015, the Conference Committee urged the Government to facilitate access to the justice system for migrant workers, including providing them with assistance with language and translation, the elimination of fees and charges related to bringing a claim, and disseminating information about the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs. It also called for these cases to be processed expeditiously.

The Committee notes the ITUC’s reference to the report of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers which highlights obstacles to access to justice for migrant workers, especially in the construction industry and domestic service. These obstacles include language as a barrier to getting information and registering a complaint. Migrant workers also very frequently fear the police, institutions and retaliation from their employers.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement that the Constitution of Qatar provides legal protection to migrant workers by granting them the right to have recourse to the courts. The Committee also notes the detailed information provided by the Government to the Governing Body in March and November 2015 on the various measures taken to assist migrant workers to have access to the available complaints mechanisms (GB.323/INS/8(Rev.1), Appendix II, paragraph 10, and GB.325/INS/10(Rev.), Appendix II, paragraphs 10 and 18). The Committee strongly encourages the Government to continue taking measures to improve the functioning of the available complaints mechanisms so that migrant workers can have rapid and effective access to these mechanisms with a view to enabling them, in practice, to approach the competent authorities and seek redress in the event of a violation of their rights or abuse, without fear of reprisal. It requests the Government to provide information on the number of complaints filed by migrant workers and their outcomes. The Committee also asks the Government to take the necessary measures to sensitize the general public and the competent authorities on the issue of migrant workers subject to forced labour and to educate employers on their responsibilities and obligations so that all the actors concerned are able to identify cases of labour exploitation, denounce them, and protect the victims. The Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that victims receive psychological, medical and legal assistance, and to provide information on the number of persons receiving such assistance from shelters or other institutions, as well as the number of shelters that exist for such purposes.

(d) Monitoring mechanisms for infringements of labour legislation. The Committee previously noted that the Government had provided statistics on the number of judicial proceedings and sentences concerning wage arrears, holiday pay and overtime.

The Committee notes that, in its conclusions adopted in June 2015, the Conference Committee urged the Government to continue to recruit additional labour inspectors and increase the material resources available to them necessary to carry out their duties, in particular labour inspections in workplaces where migrant workers are employed.

The Committee notes the ITUC’s statement that even though the number of labour inspectors increased from 200 to 294 and more interpreters were hired, this number remains insufficient as it is clear that there exist a large number of workplaces that have yet to be inspected, or inspected properly. Furthermore, it remains unclear whether inspectors have the training and resources to fulfil their tasks.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the inspectors of the Labour Inspection Department of the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, who are trained in the detection of violations and the drafting of infringement reports, carry out surprise and periodic inspection visits of undertakings. They initiate legal proceedings against undertakings found in violation. The Committee also notes the information provided by the Government to the Governing Body in November 2015 on the measures taken to strengthen the labour inspection services, particularly by expanding their geographical coverage, increasing the number of labour inspectors, raising their status and providing them with modern computer equipment The Government also provides information on the total number of labour inspection visits carried out from January to August 2015, as well as the number of cases filed by workers concerning complaints related to travel tickets, end of service bonus holiday allowance and wage arrears (GB.325/INS/10(Rev.), Appendix II, paragraphs 11–16). With regard to the protection of wages, the Government refers to Law No. 1 of 2015 and Order No. 4 of 2015, which create a special wage protection unit in the Labour Inspection Department, to monitors the implementation of the wage protection system for workers and which establish the requirement for employers to pay wages directly by bank transfer. The Committee strongly encourages the Government to pursue its efforts to strengthen mechanisms to monitor the working conditions of migrant workers and to ensure that penalties are effectively applied for the infringements detected. In this respect, it calls on the Government to continue training labour inspectors and making them aware of the issues at stake, so that the inspectorate can identify and put an end to practices that increase the vulnerability of migrant workers and expose them to forced labour practices. Lastly, the Committee refers to the comments that it is making under the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81).

(e) Imposition of penalties. The Committee previously asked the Government to provide information on the judicial proceedings instigated and the penalties applied to employers who impose forced labour.

The Committee notes that, in its conclusions, the Conference Committee urged the Government to ensure that adequate penalties are applicable in law for serious exploitation of workers, including the crime of forced labour as specified in the Penal Code, and penalties for violations of the Labour Law, and that these laws are effectively enforced.

The Committee notes the ITUC’s reference to the 2014 report of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, according to which prosecution services are influenced by high-level persons and powerful businesses and have complete discretion as to whether cases are pursued. The Special Rapporteur also noted significant allegations of partiality and bias of judges, including allegations of discrimination against migrants in favour of Qataris. According to the ITUC, guaranteeing the effective enforcement of penalties for forced labour would be assisted by judicial reform of the type recommended by the Special Rapporteur.

The Committee notes with concern that, although the Government refers to provisions in the national legislation that guarantee the freedom of work and penalize the imposition of forced labour (section 322 of the Penal Code and Law No. 15 of 2011 on combating trafficking in persons), it does not provide any information on the judicial proceedings initiated on the basis of these provisions. In this respect, the Committee notes that the situation of migrant workers in Qatar has been examined by many United Nations bodies, which have all expressed their considerable concern at the large number of migrant workers who are victims of abuse (A/HRC/27/15 of 27 June 2014, A/HRC/26/35/Add.1 of 23 April 2014 and CEDAW/C/QAT/CO/1 of 10 March 2014). Recalling that the absence of penalties applied to persons imposing forced labour creates a climate of impunity that is likely to perpetuate these practices, the Committee expresses the firm hope that the Government will take all the necessary measures to ensure that, in accordance with Article 25 of the Convention, effective and dissuasive penalties are applied in practice to those who impose forced labour. In this regard, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that thorough investigations and prosecutions are carried out of those suspected of exploitation and to prevent those found guilty from recruiting migrant workers in the future. The Committee once again asks the Government to provide information on the judicial proceedings instigated and the penalties handed down.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.