Effect given to the recommendations of the committee and the Governing Body - REPORT_NO378, June 2016

Effect given to the recommendations of the committee and the Governing Body

1. 56. The Committee last examined this case at its March 2014 meeting [see 371st Report, paras 570–579]. On that occasion it expressed the expectation that the legislation and the accompanying regulations be effectively amended without delay so as to bring them into full conformity with the principles of freedom of association and to allow for trade union pluralism at all levels. The Committee also requested the Government to keep it informed of the status of the labour law reform.
2. 57. In a communication dated 18 March 2014 and 26 October 2015, the Government recalled its explanations provided in response to the 368th Report of the Committee, reiterated its request that the ILO and the Committee provide their proposals on the current labour law amendment within the context of technical cooperation and emphasized that these views would positively assist the Government in adapting the rules and regulations according to international labour standards and freedom of association principles.
3. 58. In a communication dated 30 June 2015, the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) indicated that in the context of this case, among others, petitioners have raised a number of concerns regarding the failure of the Government to allow workers to form and join unions of their own choosing, in law and in practice. The complainant further indicated that numerous workers were precluded from forming or joining a union of their choosing and those who tried to organize independent unions were subjected to acts of violence, arrest and detention. In this respect the ITUC raises specific examples relative to Case No. 2508. The ITUC adds that it is unaware of any reforms to the labour law addressing the issues raised.
4. 59. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government and the complainant. It welcomes the Government’s indicated readiness to embrace its views in adapting the applicable rules and regulations to freedom of association principles and recalls that in its previous examination of this case it provided its views on the draft Labour Law amendments submitted by the Government, notably with regard to the fact that according to the proposed wording of section 135, the establishment of Islamic labour councils comprising representatives of workers and the management is mandatory in work units with more than 35 employees, but it is not clear how such councils will interact with workers’ trade unions active at the same unit. The Committee further noted that several sections of the proposed amendments refer to regulations which would be prepared by the High Labour Council and approved by the Minister of Cooperatives, Labour and Social Welfare or the Council of Ministers, and concluded that it was not thus clear to what extent the Labour Law and the accompanying regulations would guarantee, in law and in practice, the right of workers to come together and form organizations of their own choosing, independently and with structures that permit their members to elect their own officers, draw up and adopt their by-laws, organize their administration and activities and formulate their programmes in the defence of workers’ interests without interference from the public authorities. [See 371st Report, paras 575–577]. The Committee observes that the Government has not provided any clarification on the abovementioned points or any information on the subsequent developments of the labour law reform process and requests the Government to keep it informed in this regard.
5. 60. The Committee is bound to recall that, as no progress in legislative reform has been reported, the framework established by the Labour Law of 1990 for the formation and activities of workers’ and employers’ organizations and the relevant regulations remains in force and recalls that it has urged the Government on numerous occasions to amend this legal framework as a matter of urgency as it does not allow for trade union pluralism and as such is not in conformity with the principles of freedom of association [see 346th Report, Case No. 2508, para. 1191 and 350th Report, Case No. 2567, para. 1116]. The Committee notes with concern the information provided by the complainant as to the practical consequences of the continued application of this legal framework. In view of the foregoing, the Committee once again urges the Government to take all the necessary measures to effectively and rapidly move forward the labour law reform process with a view to bringing the law and practice into conformity with the principles of freedom of association, in particular to allow for trade union pluralism at enterprise, sector and national levels and invites the Government to avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office in this respect.