Repetition

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for the expression of political views. The Committee previously noted that certain provisions on the Criminal Code provide for sanctions of imprisonment for situations that might be covered by Article 1(a)of the Convention. It also noted that sanctions of imprisonment involve compulsory prison labour by virtue of section 107(1) of the Code on the Execution of Criminal Sentences. The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of these provisions. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that a request was sent to the Ministry of Justice regarding the application of section 189 of the Criminal Code, and Article 1of the Convention, and a response shall be sent to the Committee once it is received by the Government. The Committee once again refers to section 189 of the Criminal Code under which “propaganda of the exclusiveness of citizens by a sign to religion, national racial, or local origin, if these actions were committed in public or using means of mass media are punishable by up to five years of restriction of liberty or imprisonment for the same period”. The Committee also notes that under section 137, public insults of the President using press or other media are punishable by correctional labour up to two years, or imprisonment for a period of two to five years. Section 330(2) also provides that public insult of an official in mass media is punishable by a fine or confinement for a period of two to six months, or up to two years of imprisonment. The Committee further notes that in its concluding observations of 2013, the UN Human Rights Committee remained concern at the existence of penal provisions on liable and insult against the President (section 137) and insult against government representatives (section 330(2)) (CCPR/C/TJK/CO/2, paragraph 22). In this regard, the Committee recalls, referring to paragraphs 302–304 of its General Survey of 2012 on the fundamental Conventions, that sanctions involving compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, are incompatible with Article 1(a)of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the peaceful expression of non-violence views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system.The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of sections 137, 189 and 330(2) of the Criminal Code, as well as copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their application to enable the Committee to ascertain whether they are applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

Article 1(c). Penal sanctions applicable to public officials. The Committee previously noted that, under section 322(1) of the Criminal Code (“Negligence”), the non-performance or improper performance by a public official of his/her duties as the result of a negligent attitude, causing substantial harm to the legitimate rights and interests of persons or organizations, or to state interests, is punishable by compulsory community works or correctional labour.Noting that the Government’s report contains no information on this issue, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the court decisions handed down pursuant to section 322(1) of the Criminal Code, which could define or illustrate its application, in order to enable the Committee to ascertain whether this provision is not used as a means of labour discipline within the meaning of the Convention.

Article 1(d). Sanctions for participating in strikes. The Committee previously noted that section 160 of the Criminal Code provides that organizers of public meetings, assemblies, rallies, demonstrations and picketing conducted in violation of the established procedure are punishable with sanctions of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour). The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged with a view to ensuring that no penal sanctions involving compulsory labour can be imposed on a worker for the mere fact of a peaceful participation in a strike. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that a request was sent to the Ministry of Justice regarding the application of section 160 of the Criminal Code, and a response shall be sent to the Committee once it is received by the Government. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report submitted under the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), that section 160 of the Criminal Code proposes penalties for breaching the procedures governing the organization of rallies and demonstrations or, in some circumstances, a prison sentence of two years. Participants in peaceful strike action bear no criminal liability.While noting this information, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of section 160 of the Criminal Code, particularly on the relevant court decisions handed down under this section, and the penalties imposed.

Repetition

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for the expression of political views. The Committee previously noted that certain provisions on the Criminal Code provide for sanctions of imprisonment for situations that might be covered by Article 1(a) of the Convention. It also noted that sanctions of imprisonment involve compulsory prison labour by virtue of section 107(1) of the Code on the Execution of Criminal Sentences. The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of these provisions.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that a request was sent to the Ministry of Justice regarding the application of section 189 of the Criminal Code, and Article 1 of the Convention, and a response shall be sent to the Committee once it is received by the Government.

The Committee once again refers to section 189 of the Criminal Code under which “propaganda of the exclusiveness of citizens by a sign to religion, national racial, or local origin, if these actions were committed in public or using means of mass media are punishable by up to five years of restriction of liberty or imprisonment for the same period”. The Committee also notes that under section 137, public insults of the President using press or other media are punishable by correctional labour up to two years, or imprisonment for a period of two to five years. Section 330(2) also provides that public insult of an official in mass media is punishable by a fine or confinement for a period of two to six months, or up to two years of imprisonment. The Committee further notes that in its concluding observations of 2013, the UN Human Rights Committee remained concern at the existence of penal provisions on liable and insult against the President (section 137) and insult against government representatives (section 330(2)) (CCPR/C/TJK/CO/2, paragraph 22).

In this regard, the Committee recalls, referring to paragraphs 302–304 of its General Survey of 2012 on the fundamental Conventions, that sanctions involving compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, are incompatible with Article 1(a) of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the peaceful expression of non-violence views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of sections 137, 189 and 330(2) of the Criminal Code, as well as copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their application to enable the Committee to ascertain whether they are applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

Article 1(c). Penal sanctions applicable to public officials. The Committee previously noted that, under section 322(1) of the Criminal Code (“Negligence”), the non-performance or improper performance by a public official of his/her duties as the result of a negligent attitude, causing substantial harm to the legitimate rights and interests of persons or organizations, or to state interests, is punishable by compulsory community works or correctional labour. Noting that the Government’s report contains no information on this issue, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the court decisions handed down pursuant to section 322(1) of the Criminal Code, which could define or illustrate its application, in order to enable the Committee to ascertain whether this provision is not used as a means of labour discipline within the meaning of the Convention.

Article 1(d). Sanctions for participating in strikes. The Committee previously noted that section 160 of the Criminal Code provides that organizers of public meetings, assemblies, rallies, demonstrations and picketing conducted in violation of the established procedure are punishable with sanctions of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour). The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged with a view to ensuring that no penal sanctions involving compulsory labour can be imposed on a worker for the mere fact of a peaceful participation in a strike. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that a request was sent to the Ministry of Justice regarding the application of section 160 of the Criminal Code, and a response shall be sent to the Committee once it is received by the Government. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report submitted under the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), that section 160 of the Criminal Code proposes penalties for breaching the procedures governing the organization of rallies and demonstrations or, in some circumstances, a prison sentence of two years. Participants in peaceful strike action bear no criminal liability. While noting this information, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of section 160 of the Criminal Code, particularly on the relevant court decisions handed down under this section, and the penalties imposed.

Repetition

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for the expression of political views. The Committee previously noted that certain provisions on the Criminal Code provide for sanctions of imprisonment for situations that might be covered by Article 1(a) of the Convention. It also noted that sanctions of imprisonment involve compulsory prison labour by virtue of section 107(1) of the Code on the Execution of Criminal Sentences. The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of these provisions.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that a request was sent to the Ministry of Justice regarding the application of section 189 of the Criminal Code, and Article 1 of the Convention, and a response shall be sent to the Committee once it is received by the Government.

The Committee once again refers to section 189 of the Criminal Code under which “propaganda of the exclusiveness of citizens by a sign to religion, national racial, or local origin, if these actions were committed in public or using means of mass media are punishable by up to five years of restriction of liberty or imprisonment for the same period”. The Committee also notes that under section 137, public insults of the President using press or other media are punishable by correctional labour up to two years, or imprisonment for a period of two to five years. Section 330(2) also provides that public insult of an official in mass media is punishable by a fine or confinement for a period of two to six months, or up to two years of imprisonment. The Committee further notes that in its concluding observations of 2013, the UN Human Rights Committee remained concern at the existence of penal provisions on liable and insult against the President (section 137) and insult against government representatives (section 330(2)) (CCPR/C/TJK/CO/2, paragraph 22).

In this regard, the Committee recalls, referring to paragraphs 302–304 of its General Survey of 2012 on the fundamental Conventions, that sanctions involving compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, are incompatible with Article 1(a) of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the peaceful expression of non-violence views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of sections 137, 189 and 330(2) of the Criminal Code, as well as copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their application to enable the Committee to ascertain whether they are applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

Article 1(c). Penal sanctions applicable to public officials. The Committee previously noted that, under section 322(1) of the Criminal Code (“Negligence”), the non-performance or improper performance by a public official of his/her duties as the result of a negligent attitude, causing substantial harm to the legitimate rights and interests of persons or organizations, or to state interests, is punishable by compulsory community works or correctional labour. Noting that the Government’s report contains no information on this issue, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the court decisions handed down pursuant to section 322(1) of the Criminal Code, which could define or illustrate its application, in order to enable the Committee to ascertain whether this provision is not used as a means of labour discipline within the meaning of the Convention.

Article 1(d). Sanctions for participating in strikes. The Committee previously noted that section 160 of the Criminal Code provides that organizers of public meetings, assemblies, rallies, demonstrations and picketing conducted in violation of the established procedure are punishable with sanctions of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour). The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged with a view to ensuring that no penal sanctions involving compulsory labour can be imposed on a worker for the mere fact of a peaceful participation in a strike. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that a request was sent to the Ministry of Justice regarding the application of section 160 of the Criminal Code, and a response shall be sent to the Committee once it is received by the Government. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report submitted under the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), that section 160 of the Criminal Code proposes penalties for breaching the procedures governing the organization of rallies and demonstrations or, in some circumstances, a prison sentence of two years. Participants in peaceful strike action bear no criminal liability. While noting this information, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of section 160 of the Criminal Code, particularly on the relevant court decisions handed down under this section, and the penalties imposed.

Repetition

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for the expression of political views. The Committee previously noted that certain provisions on the Criminal Code provide for sanctions of imprisonment for situations that might be covered by Article 1(a) of the Convention. It also noted that sanctions of imprisonment involve compulsory prison labour by virtue of section 107(1) of the Code on the Execution of Criminal Sentences. The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of these provisions.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that a request was sent to the Ministry of Justice regarding the application of section 189 of the Criminal Code, and Article 1 of the Convention, and a response shall be sent to the Committee once it is received by the Government.

The Committee once again refers to section 189 of the Criminal Code under which “propaganda of the exclusiveness of citizens by a sign to religion, national racial, or local origin, if these actions were committed in public or using means of mass media are punishable by up to five years of restriction of liberty or imprisonment for the same period”. The Committee also notes that under section 137, public insults of the President using press or other media are punishable by correctional labour up to two years, or imprisonment for a period of two to five years. Section 330(2) also provides that public insult of an official in mass media is punishable by a fine or confinement for a period of two to six months, or up to two years of imprisonment. The Committee further notes that in its concluding observations of 2013, the UN Human Rights Committee remained concern at the existence of penal provisions on liable and insult against the President (section 137) and insult against government representatives (section 330(2)) (CCPR/C/TJK/CO/2, para. 22).

In this regard, the Committee recalls, referring to paragraphs 302–304 of its General Survey of 2012 on the fundamental Conventions, that sanctions involving compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, are incompatible with Article 1(a) of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the peaceful expression of non-violence views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of sections 137, 189 and 330(2) of the Criminal Code, as well as copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their application to enable the Committee to ascertain whether they are applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

Article 1(c). Penal sanctions applicable to public officials. The Committee previously noted that, under section 322(1) of the Criminal Code (“Negligence”), the non-performance or improper performance by a public official of his/her duties as the result of a negligent attitude, causing substantial harm to the legitimate rights and interests of persons or organizations, or to state interests, is punishable by compulsory community works or correctional labour. Noting that the Government’s report contains no information on this issue, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the court decisions handed down pursuant to section 322(1) of the Criminal Code, which could define or illustrate its application, in order to enable the Committee to ascertain whether this provision is not used as a means of labour discipline within the meaning of the Convention.

Article 1(d). Sanctions for participating in strikes. The Committee previously noted that section 160 of the Criminal Code provides that organizers of public meetings, assemblies, rallies, demonstrations and picketing conducted in violation of the established procedure are punishable with sanctions of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour). The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged with a view to ensuring that no penal sanctions involving compulsory labour can be imposed on a worker for the mere fact of a peaceful participation in a strike. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that a request was sent to the Ministry of Justice regarding the application of section 160 of the Criminal Code, and a response shall be sent to the Committee once it is received by the Government. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report submitted under the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), that section 160 of the Criminal Code proposes penalties for breaching the procedures governing the organization of rallies and demonstrations or, in some circumstances, a prison sentence of two years. Participants in peaceful strike action bear no criminal liability. While noting this information, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of section 160 of the Criminal Code, particularly on the relevant court decisions handed down under this section, and the penalties imposed.

Repetition

Communication of texts. The Committee notes the Law on political parties, the Law on information and the Law on assemblies, meetings, demonstrations and peaceful processions, supplied by the Government with its report. The Committee requests the Government to supply copies of the Broadcasting Law and the Law governing the press, to which reference is made in section 17 of the Law on information.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for the expression of political or ideological views. The Committee previously noted that the Criminal Code provides for sanctions of imprisonment (which involves compulsory prison labour by virtue of section 107(1) of the Code on the Execution of Criminal Sentences) for the “inciting national, racial or religious hatred” made publicly or through mass media (section 189). The Committee also noted that, under section 160 of the Criminal Code, organizers of public meetings, assemblies, rallies, demonstrations and picketing conducted in violation of the established procedure are punishable with sanctions of imprisonment (which involves compulsory prison labour as explained above).

The Committee recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It refers in this connection to paragraph 154 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour, where it observed that the Convention does not prohibit punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence, incite to violence or engage in preparatory acts aimed at violence. But sanctions involving compulsory labour fall within the scope of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the peaceful expression of views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system, whether such prohibition is imposed by law or by a discretionary administrative decision. The freedom of expression of political or ideological views may be equally restricted by way of prohibition of various kinds of meetings or assemblies, which is also contrary to the Convention, if such prohibition is enforced by sanctions involving compulsory labour.

Noting that the Government’s report contains no information on the above issues, the Committee hopes that the Government will not fail to provide, in its next report, information on the application of the abovementioned sections 160 and 189 of the Criminal Code in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their scope, so as to enable the Committee to ascertain whether they are applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

The Committee previously noted that under sections 307-1, 307-2 and 308 of the Criminal Code relating to the “extremist activities”, the following acts are punishable with sanctions of imprisonment (which involves compulsory prison labour): public appeal to performing extremist activities (including through mass media or the Internet), establishment of an extremist group or organization and participation in such a group or organization or a political party prohibited by a court decision.

Referring to the above explanations, the Committee requests the Government once again to provide, in its next report, information on the application of the abovementioned sections in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their scope, and clarifying in particular the notion of “extremist activities”, so as to enable the Committee to ascertain their conformity with the Convention.

Article 1(c). Penal sanctions applicable to public officials. The Committee previously noted that, under section 322(1) of the Criminal Code (“Negligence”), the non-performance or improper performance by a public official of his/her duties as the result of a negligent attitude, causing substantial harm to legitimate rights and interests of persons or organizations, or to state interests, is punishable by compulsory community works or correctional labour.

Noting that the Government’s report contains no information on this issue, the Committee again requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the court decisions passed under section 322(1) of the Criminal Code, which could define or illustrate its scope, including sample copies of such decisions, in order to enable the Committee to ascertain whether this provision is not used as a means of labour discipline within the meaning of the Convention.

Article 1(d). Sanctions for participating in strikes. Referring to its comments made under Article 1(a) of the Convention concerning section 160 of the Criminal Code, under which organizers of public meetings, assemblies, rallies, demonstrations and picketing conducted in violation of the established procedure are punishable with sanctions of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour), the Committee previously requested the Government to indicate whether this section is applicable to participants in unlawful strikes. The Committee notes the Government’s statement in the report that the Law on assemblies, meetings, demonstrations and peaceful processions does not contain provisions concerning strikes. It also notes the Government’s indication that measures are being taken with a view to amending this Law.

Referring also to its comments made under the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), the Committee hopes that the Government will provide, in its next report, information on measures taken or envisaged with a view to ensuring that no penal sanctions involving compulsory labour can be imposed on a worker for the mere fact of a peaceful participation in a strike.

Repetition

Communication of texts. The Committee notes the Law on political parties, the Law on information and the Law on assemblies, meetings, demonstrations and peaceful processions, supplied by the Government with its report. The Committee requests the Government to supply copies of the Broadcasting Law and the Law governing the press, to which reference is made in section 17 of the Law on information.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for the expression of political or ideological views. The Committee previously noted that the Criminal Code provides for sanctions of imprisonment (which involves compulsory prison labour by virtue of section 107(1) of the Code on the Execution of Criminal Sentences) for the “inciting national, racial or religious hatred” made publicly or through mass media (section 189). The Committee also noted that, under section 160 of the Criminal Code, organizers of public meetings, assemblies, rallies, demonstrations and picketing conducted in violation of the established procedure are punishable with sanctions of imprisonment (which involves compulsory prison labour as explained above).

The Committee recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It refers in this connection to paragraph 154 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour, where it observed that the Convention does not prohibit punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence, incite to violence or engage in preparatory acts aimed at violence. But sanctions involving compulsory labour fall within the scope of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the peaceful expression of views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system, whether such prohibition is imposed by law or by a discretionary administrative decision. The freedom of expression of political or ideological views may be equally restricted by way of prohibition of various kinds of meetings or assemblies, which is also contrary to the Convention, if such prohibition is enforced by sanctions involving compulsory labour.

Noting that the Government’s report contains no information on the above issues, the Committee hopes that the Government will not fail to provide, in its next report, information on the application of the abovementioned sections 160 and 189 of the Criminal Code in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their scope, so as to enable the Committee to ascertain whether they are applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

The Committee previously noted that under sections 307-1, 307-2 and 308 of the Criminal Code relating to the “extremist activities”, the following acts are punishable with sanctions of imprisonment (which involves compulsory prison labour): public appeal to performing extremist activities (including through mass media or the Internet), establishment of an extremist group or organization and participation in such a group or organization or a political party prohibited by a court decision.

Referring to the above explanations, the Committee requests the Government once again to provide, in its next report, information on the application of the abovementioned sections in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their scope, and clarifying in particular the notion of “extremist activities”, so as to enable the Committee to ascertain their conformity with the Convention.

Article 1(c). Penal sanctions applicable to public officials. The Committee previously noted that, under section 322(1) of the Criminal Code (“Negligence”), the non-performance or improper performance by a public official of his/her duties as the result of a negligent attitude, causing substantial harm to legitimate rights and interests of persons or organizations, or to state interests, is punishable by compulsory community works or correctional labour.

Noting that the Government’s report contains no information on this issue, the Committee again requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the court decisions passed under section 322(1) of the Criminal Code, which could define or illustrate its scope, including sample copies of such decisions, in order to enable the Committee to ascertain whether this provision is not used as a means of labour discipline within the meaning of the Convention.

Article 1(d). Sanctions for participating in strikes. Referring to its comments made under Article 1(a) of the Convention concerning section 160 of the Criminal Code, under which organizers of public meetings, assemblies, rallies, demonstrations and picketing conducted in violation of the established procedure are punishable with sanctions of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour), the Committee previously requested the Government to indicate whether this section is applicable to participants in unlawful strikes. The Committee notes the Government’s statement in the report that the Law on assemblies, meetings, demonstrations and peaceful processions does not contain provisions concerning strikes. It also notes the Government’s indication that measures are being taken with a view to amending this Law.

Referring also to its comments made under the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), the Committee hopes that the Government will provide, in its next report, information on measures taken or envisaged with a view to ensuring that no penal sanctions involving compulsory labour can be imposed on a worker for the mere fact of a peaceful participation in a strike.