National Legislation on Labour and Social Rights
Global database on occupational safety and health legislation
Employment protection legislation database
DISPLAYINEnglish - French - Spanish
Repetition Article 1(a) of the Convention. Punishment for expressing political views. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that Legislative Decree No. 65 of 1979, which imposed certain restrictions on the organization of public meetings and gatherings enforceable with penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour), was declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court in 2006. It also noted that a new law concerning public meetings and gatherings was drafted in 2008. In its latest report, the Government indicates that the draft law referred to above has not yet been adopted. The Committee reiterates its hope that the law concerning public meetings and gatherings will be adopted in the near future and that the Government will communicate a copy for the examination by the Committee.Article 1(c) and (d). Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. Over a number of years, the Committee has been referring to certain provisions of Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 regarding security, order and discipline on board ship, under which various breaches of discipline (unauthorized absence, repeated disobedience, failure to return to the vessel) committed by common agreement by three persons may be punished by imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour). The Committee recalled that penalties imposed for violations of labour discipline or punishment for having participated in a strike do not come within the scope of the Convention only if such acts endanger the safety of the vessel or the life or health of persons. The Committee observed that sections 11, 12 and 13 of the above Legislative Decree do not appear to limit the application of the penalties to such acts.The Committee notes the Government’s commitment expressed in the report to bring legislation into conformity with the Convention, and in particular, the Government’s indication that the necessary measures are being taken to amend the abovementioned Decree. The Committee trusts that the Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 will be amended in the near future, for example by clearly indicating that the imposition of penalties involving compulsory labour is strictly limited to acts endangering the vessel or the life or health of persons. Pending the amendment, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the application of the Legislative Decree in practice, supplying copies of court decisions and indicating the penalties imposed.
Article 1(a) of the Convention. Punishment for expressing political views. The Committee previously noted that Legislative Decree No. 65 of 1979, which imposed certain restrictions on the organization of public meetings and gatherings enforceable with penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour), was declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court in 2006. It also noted that a new law concerning public meetings and gatherings was drafted in 2008. While noting the Government’s indication that the new law concerning public meetings and gatherings is still in the draft form, the Committee hopes that this law will soon be adopted and that the Government will communicate a copy for the examination by the Committee.
Article 1(c) and (d). Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. For many years, the Committee has been referring to certain provisions of Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 regarding security, order and discipline on board ship, under which various breaches of discipline (unauthorized absence, repeated disobedience, failure to return to the vessel) committed by common agreement by three persons may be punished by imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour). The Committee recalls that penalties imposed for violations of labour discipline or punishment for having participated in a strike do not come within the scope of the Convention if the acts endanger the safety of the vessel or the life or health of persons. The Committee notes that sections 11, 12 and 13 of the Legislative Decree do not appear to limit the application of the penalties to such acts.
The Committee notes the Government’s indication in the report that no penalties have been imposed under Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 and no violations of its provisions have been committed. The Government also undertakes to communicate information on any measures taken with regard to the above Legislative Decree. While noting these indications, the Committee expresses the firm hope that the necessary measures to amend Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 will soon be taken, for example by clearly indicating that the imposition of penalties involving compulsory labour is strictly limited to acts endangering the vessel or the life or health of persons. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the application of the Legislative Decree in practice, supplying copies of court decisions and indicating the penalties imposed.
Article 1(a) of the Convention. Punishment for expressing political views. For a number of years, the Committee has been referring to Legislative Decree No. 65 of 1979 concerning public meetings and gatherings, which establishes a system of prior authorization (which may be refused without giving reasons, under section 6 of the above Decree) and, in the event of violations, provides for a penalty of imprisonment involving, by virtue of the Penal Code, an obligation to work. The Committee stressed the importance for the effective observance of the Convention of legal guarantees respecting the right of assembly and the direct bearing that a restriction of this right can have on the application of the Convention. Indeed, it is often through the exercise of this right that political opposition to the established order can be expressed, and in ratifying the Convention the State has undertaken to guarantee persons who manifest this opposition in a peaceful manner the protection that the Convention affords them.
The Committee has noted the Government’s indication in its report received in August 2007 that consultations will be held with the competent authorities to discuss the feasibility of amending section 2 of the above Legislative Decree, which provides for the exemption of certain kinds of meetings from its scope. However, the Committee has become aware that Legislative Decree No. 65 of 1979 was declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court in 2006. It has also noted that a new law concerning public meetings and gatherings was promulgated in 2008. The Committee would appreciate it if the Government would communicate a copy of the new law with its next report, so that the Committee can examine it at its next session.
Article 2(c) and (d). Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. For many years, the Committee has been referring to certain provisions of Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 regarding security, order and discipline on board ship, under which various breaches of discipline (unauthorized absence, repeated disobedience, failure to return to the vessel) committed by common agreement by three persons may be punished by imprisonment involving an obligation to work. The Committee recalled that penalties imposed for violations of labour discipline or punishment for having participated in a strike do not come within the scope of the Convention only where such acts endanger the safety of the vessel or the life or health of persons, but that sections 11, 12 and 13 of the above Legislative Decree do not limit the application of the penalties to such acts.
The Committee has noted the Government’s repeated statement that it gives utmost priority to the adoption of the necessary measures to remove any conflict with the provisions of the Convention. The Government also states that Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 is intended to address dangerous acts which endanger the safety of the vessel or the life or health of persons on board, and the imposition of penalties is restricted in all cases to such acts.
While noting these indications, the Committee reiterates its hope that the necessary measures to amend Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 will be taken, e.g. by clearly indicating that the imposition of penalties involving compulsory labour is strictly limited to acts endangering the vessel or the life or health of persons. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee requests the Government to supply information on the application of the above Legislative Decree in practice, supplying copies of court decisions and indicating the penalties imposed.
The Committee notes the Government’s brief indication in its report that no developments have occurred in regard to the points raised in the Committee’s previous observation. Since the Government’s report contains no further information in reply to previous comments, the Committee must therefore repeat its previous observation on the following matters:
Article 1(a) of the Convention. For a number of years, the Committee has been referring to Legislative Decree No. 65 of 1979 with respect to public meetings and gatherings, which establishes a system of prior authorization (which may be refused without giving reasons, under section 6 of the above Decree) and, in the event of violations, provides for a penalty of imprisonment involving, by virtue of the Penal Code, an obligation to work. The Committee stressed the importance for the effective observance of the Convention of legal guarantees regarding the right of assembly and the direct bearing that a restriction of this right can have on the application of the Convention. Indeed, it is often through the exercise of this right that political opposition to the established order can be expressed, and in ratifying the Convention the State has undertaken to guarantee persons who manifest this opposition in a peaceful manner the protection that the Convention affords them.
In its report received in October 2002, the Government reiterated that the prior authorization provided for in the aforementioned Decree is required for the sake of public security and that no violations of the Decree had occurred and consequently no judicial decisions had been issued. However, in its previous report received in January 2002, the Government stated that meetings politically opposing the current system are not covered by the Decree, since a list of meetings, which shall not be considered public in virtue of section 2 of the Decree and therefore exempted from the scope of the Decree, is not exhaustive. The Committee requests the Government to clarify this issue, particularly with regard to political public meetings, since section 2 apparently excludes only those meetings which are not considered to be public. It hopes that measures will be taken to clearly exclude political public meetings from the application of the above Decree, e.g. by amending the wording of section 2, in order to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention and the indicated practice. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee asks the Government to continue to supply information on the application of the Decree in practice, including the number of convictions for violations of its provisions and copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their scope.
Article 1(c) and (d). For many years, the Committee has been referring to Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 with respect to security, order and discipline on board ship, under the terms of which certain breaches of discipline (unauthorized absence, repeated disobedience, failure to return to the vessel) committed by common agreement by three persons may be punished by imprisonment involving an obligation to work. The Committee noted that penalties imposed for violations of labour discipline or punishment for having participated in a strike do not come within the scope of the Convention where such acts endanger the safety of the vessel or the life or safety of the persons on board, but that sections 11, 12 and 13 of the above Decree do not limit the application of the penalties to such acts.
The Committee has noted the Government’s statement in its reports received in 2002 that it attaches great importance to bringing Decree No. 31 of 1980 into conformity with the provisions of the Convention and intends to take the necessary measures in this direction.
The Committee hopes that the necessary measures to amend Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 will be taken in the near future with a view to ensuring that the imposition of penalties involving compulsory labour will be limited to cases in which the violations committed constitute a danger for the vessel or for the life or safety of persons, and that the Government will provide information on the action taken to this end.
The Committee has noted the information provided by the Government in reply to its earlier comments.
Article 2(c) and (d). For many years, the Committee has been referring to Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 with respect to security, order and discipline on board ship, under the terms of which certain breaches of discipline (unauthorized absence, repeated disobedience, failure to return to the vessel) committed by common agreement by three persons may be punished by imprisonment involving an obligation to work. The Committee noted that penalties imposed for violations of labour discipline or punishment for having participated in a strike do not come within the scope of the Convention where such acts endanger the safety of the vessel or the life or safety of the persons on board, but that sections 11, 12 and 13 of the above Decree do not limit the application of the penalties to such acts.
The Committee has noted with interest the Government’s statement in its reports received in 2002 that it attaches great importance to bringing Decree No. 31 of 1980 into conformity with the provisions of the Convention and intends to take the necessary measures in this direction. The Government requests the technical assistance of the International Labour Office in this regard.
The Committee notes that the Government’s report contains no reply to previous comments. It must therefore repeat its previous observations which read as follows:
1. Article 1(a) of the Convention. For over ten years, the Committee has been referring in its comments to Legislative Decree No. 65 of 1979 respecting public meetings and gatherings, which establishes a system of prior authorization and, in the event of violations, provides for a penalty of imprisonment which involves, by virtue of the Penal Code, the obligation to work. The Committee noted that under section 6 of the above Decree, such authorization may be refused without giving reasons and that appeals against such refusal can be lodged only with the Minister of the Interior, whose decision is final. The Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure observance of the Convention on this point.
In its previous report, the Government reiterated that the prior authorization provided for in the aforementioned Decree is a measure of national security and that it does not apply to private meetings.
The Committee recalls that it has noted on several occasions the importance for the effective observance of the Convention of legal guarantees respecting the right of assembly and the direct bearing that a restriction of this right can have on the application of the Convention. Indeed, it is often through the exercise of this right that political opposition to the established order can be expressed, and in ratifying the Convention the State has undertaken to guarantee persons who manifest this opposition in a peaceful manner the protection that the Convention affords them.
The Committee again asks the Government to take the necessary measures to bring Decree No. 65 of 1979 into conformity with the Convention, and, pending such action, to supply information on the application in practice of the provisions of the Decree, including the number of convictions for violations of its provisions and copies of any court decisions that define or illustrate their scope.
2. Article 2(c) and (d). In the comments that it has been making for more than ten years, the Committee has referred to Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 respecting security, order and discipline on board ship, under the terms of which certain breaches of discipline (unauthorized absence, repeated disobedience, failure to return to the vessel) committed by common agreement by three persons may be punished by imprisonment including an obligation to work.
The Committee noted that penalties imposed for violations of labour discipline or punishment for having participated in a strike do not come within the scope of the Convention where such acts endanger the safety of the vessel or the life or safety of the persons on board, but that sections 11, 12 and 13 of Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 do not limit the application of the penalties involved in such acts.
The Committee requested the Government to re-examine Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 in the light of the Convention and to indicate the measures taken to bring the legislation on merchant shipping into conformity with the Convention.
In its previous report, the Government again referred to the need to be able to grant the captain of a vessel the necessary powers to maintain discipline and safety on board.
The Committee once more expresses the hope that the Government will take the necessary measures to amend Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 in order to limit the imposition of penalties involving compulsory labour to cases in which the violations committed constitute a danger for the life or safety of the persons on board and that it will provide information on the action taken to this effect.
The Committee notes the Government's reports.
In its latest report, the Government reiterates that the prior authorization provided for in the aforementioned Decree is a measure of national security and that it does not apply to private meetings.
In its latest report, the Government again refers to the need to be able to grant the captain of a vessel the necessary powers to maintain discipline and safety on board.
1. Article 1(a) of the Convention. For over ten years, the Committee has been referring in its comments to Legislative Decree No. 65 of 1979 respecting public meetings and gatherings, which establishes a system of prior authorization and, in the event of violations, provides for a penalty of imprisonment which involves, by virtue of the Penal Code, the obligation to work. The Committee noted that under section 6 of the above Decree, such authorization may be refused without giving reasons and that appeals against such refusal can be lodged only with the Minister of the Interior, whose decision is final. The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the application in practice of the provisions of Legislative Decree No. 65 of 1979, including the number of convictions for violations of these provisions and copies of court decisions that define or illustrate their scope, and to take the necessary measures to bring the above Decree into conformity with the Convention.
The Committee noted the Government's reiterated statement that the rules of law established by the State to assure public order are based on the sovereign right of States and that asking for the amendment of these rules represents an interference in the internal affairs of the country.
The Committee has noted on several occasions the importance for the effective observance of the Convention of legal guarantees respecting the right of assembly and the direct bearing that a restriction of this right can have on the application of the Convention. Indeed, it is often through the exercise of this right that political opposition to the established order can be expressed, and in ratifying the Convention the State has undertaken to guarantee persons who manifest this opposition in a peaceful manner the protection that the Convention affords them.
In its latest report, the Government states that the Constitution guarantees to individuals the right to hold private meetings without prior authorization and that public meetings which are peaceful and not contrary to morals are permitted under the conditions specified by the law, namely authorization from the governor of the district, which is subject to the requirements of public security. The Committee notes that this matter has been the subject of its comments for more than ten years and requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure observance of the Convention on this point.
2. In the comments that it has been making for more than ten years, the Committee has referred to Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 respecting security, order and discipline on board ship, under the terms of which certain breaches of discipline (unauthorized absence, repeated disobedience, failure to return to the vessel) committed by common agreement by three persons may be punished by imprisonment including the obligation to work.
The Committee noted that penalties imposed for violations of labour discipline or punishment for having participated in a strike do not come within the scope of the Convention where such acts endanger the safety of the vessel or the life or safety of the persons on board, but that sections 11, 12 and 13 of Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 do not limit the application of the penalties involved to such acts.
The Committee requested to Government to re-examine Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 in the light of the Convention and to indicate the measures taken to bring the legislation on merchant shipping into conformity with the Convention.
In its latest report, the Government refers to the need to be able to grant the captain of a vessel the necessary powers to maintain discipline and safety on board.
The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 in order to limit the imposition of penalties involving forced labour to cases in which the violations committed constitute a danger for the life or safety of the persons on board and to provide information on the progress achieved in this respect.
The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its reports.
1. Article 1(a) of the Convention. In its previous direct request, the Committee noted that Legislative Decree No. 65 of 1979 respecting public meetings and gatherings establishes a system of prior authorization, providing in the event of violations for the penalty of imprisonment which involves, by virtue of the Penal Code, the obligation to work. The Committee notes that under section 6 of the above Decree, authorization may be tacitly refused without giving reasons, and appeals against a refusal can be lodged only with the Minister of the Interior, whose decision is final. The Committee notes the Government's reiterated statement that the rules of law established by the State in different areas in the form of laws, decrees, orders, or regulations, respond to the need for public order and that infractions of these provisions are punishable by a penalty so as to ensure their strict and effective application. This system is based on the sovereign right of States to govern throughout their territory. In the Government's opinion, asking for the amendment of these rules of law represents an interference in the internal affairs of the country; such a request is therefore not permissible and must be rejected.
The Committee notes the Government's indications. It must point out once again that in ratifying the Convention, the Government has undertaken to suppress, in its internal law, any sanctions involving compulsory labour, which would be imposed as a punishment for holding or expressing certain political views, or expressing their ideological opposition to the established political, social or economic system. As the Committee pointed out in paragraphs 138 and 139 of its 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour, observance of the Convention is in jeopardy where the Government may prohibit, subject to sanctions involving compulsory labour, specified persons from attending or addressing meetings or gatherings, or generally from taking part in any political activities. Since opinions and views ideologically opposed to the established system are often expressed at various kinds of meetings, the prohibition of specific categories of meetings may give rise to political coercion involving sanctions which are contrary to the Convention.
The Committee requests the Government re-examine the situation and to indicate the measures which it envisages taking to ensure the full conformity of the legislation with the provisions of the Convention.
2. Article 1(c). In its previous comments, the Committee noted that under Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 regarding security, order and discipline on board ship, certain breaches of discipline (including unauthorized absence, repeated disobedience or failure to return to the vessel) committed by common agreement by three persons may be punished by imprisonment including the obligation to work. The Committee observed that penalties inflicted as labour discipline or punishment for having participated in a strike involving acts endangering the safety of the vessel or the life or health of the persons on board do not come within the scope of the Convention. However, sections 11, 12 and 13 of the Decree do not limit the application of these sanctions to the above acts. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to re-examine the Legislative Decree in the light of the Convention and the Committee's comments in paragraphs 117 and 125 of the above General Survey, and to indicate in its next report any measures which have been taken or are envisaged to bring the legislation on merchant shipping into conformity with the Convention on this point.
1. Article 1(a) of the Convention. Under Legislative Decree No. 65 of 1979 respecting public meetings and gatherings a system of prior authorisation is established, providing for the penalty of imprisonment (involving the obligation to work by virtue of the Penal Code) for non-compliance. The Committee has observed that under section 6 of the Decree, authorisation may be tacitly refused without giving reasons, and appeals against a refusal can be lodged only with the Minister of the Interior, whose decision shall be final. The Committee notes the Government's statement that the rules of law established by the State in different areas in the form of laws, decrees, orders, or regulations, respond to the need for public order; infractions of these provisions are punishable by a penalty so as to ensure their strict and effective application. This system is based on the sovereign right of States to govern within their territory. In the Government's opinion asking for the amendment of these rules of law represents an incursion into the internal affairs of the country; such a request is therefore not permissible and must be rejected.
The Committee takes note of the Government's indications. It must point out that in ratifying the Convention, the Government has undertaken to suppress, in its internal law, any sanctions involving compulsory labour, which would be imposed as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. As the Committee pointed out in paragraphs 138 and 139 of its 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour, observance of the Convention is in jeopardy where the Government may prohibit, subject to sanctions involving compulsory labour, specified persons from attending or addressing meetings or gatherings or generally from taking part in any political activities. Since opinions and views ideologically opposed to the established system are often expressed at various kinds of meetings, the prohibition of specific categories of meetings may give rise to political coercion involving sanctions contrary to the Convention.
The Committee has previously noted the Government's indications that there have been no recorded cases of denial of authorisation to hold a public meeting, it therefore hopes that on an appropriate occasion, it will be possible to bring Legislative Decree No. 65 of 1979 into conformity with practice as well as the Convention, and that the Government will indicate the action taken. Pending amendment of the Decree, the Committee requests the Government to continue to supply information on the practical application of section 5, including the number of cases in which authorisation was requested and granted and those in which it was refused, as well as sections 16 to 18 and 20 of the Decree, including the number of convictions made thereunder and copies of relevant court decisions.
2. Article 1(c). In previous comments the Committee noted that under Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 regarding security, order and discipline on board ship, certain breaches of discipline (including unauthorised absence, repeated disobedience or failure to return to the vessel) committed by common agreement by three persons may be punished by imprisonment including the obligation to perform work. The Committee has observed that penalties inflicted as labour discipline or punishment for having participated in a strike involving acts endangering the safety of the vessel or the life or health of the persons on board do not come within the scope of the Convention. Sections 11, 12 and 13 of the Decree do not, however, limit the application of punishment involving compulsory labour to cases which endanger the safety of the vessel or the life or health of the persons on board. The Committee accordingly again requests the Government to re-examine Legislative Decree No. 31 of 1980 in the light of the Convention and the Committee's comments in paragraphs 117 and 125 of the 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour, and to indicate in its next report any measures taken or under consideration to bring the legislation on merchant shipping into conformity with the Convention on this point.