Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report.

1. Referring to its previous comments the Committee notes that on 20 December 1991 the Supreme Soviet adopted the Act respecting the social and legal protection of military personnel and their family members. The Committee notes the Government's indication that under section 8, subsection 2, "military personnel, with the exception of those serving for a fixed period, may not be discharged from military service until they become entitled to retirement pensions, except for cases in which their service is terminated at their own request in connection with their state of health, the end of their period of service or failure to fulfil the conditions of their contract" ... which shows, according to the Government, that legislation provides for the possibility of military personnel being discharged at their own request. The Government adds that under section 5 of the Act military personnel have the right to appeal in court against unlawful acts of military officials and military administrative bodies.

While noting the Government's indication on judicial remedies, the Committee notes, however, that under paragraph 2 of article 8 of the Act, discharge on own request for military personnel serving under a contract other than a fixed-term, is limited by reference to their state of health. The Committee would draw the Government's attention to paragraphs 67 to 73 of its 1979 General Survey on Forced or Compulsory Labour where it referred to restriction on freedom of workers to terminate employment and where it pointed out that persons in the service of the State, including military personnel, should have the right to leave the service on their own initiative within a reasonable period, either at specified intervals or by giving notice.

The Committee hopes that the Government will provide information on measures taken or envisaged with a view to ensuring the observance of the Convention in this respect.

2. Article 25 of the Convention. In its previous comments the Committee took note of observations made by the Malapolski Regional Direction of the Independent Self-Governing Trade Union "Solidarity" (Solidarnosc) and by the Local Committee of the Kharkov City Trade Union Organization of Engineering Workers, (communications of February, March, April 1991 and February 1992). In these communications it was alleged that forced labour had been used over many years everywhere in the former USSR in building factory and residential buidings, on vegetable production bases and in the execution of practically all kinds of agricultural tasks.

As concerns the use of auxiliary labour in agriculture, the Committee noted the Government's indication that the recruitment of labour, formerly carried out under various decisions of governmental bodies of the Republic, is now organized exclusively on a voluntary basis. The Committee requested the Government to supply more details on the manner in which this voluntary labour is organized.

The Committee notes that in relation to auxiliary labour in agriculture, the Government indicates that, unlike previous years, when the workforce was recruited on the basis of various decisions of Government bodies, the recruitment of labour for seasonal agricultural work, is currently organized exclusively on the basis of mutually advantageous agreements between agricultural and industrial enterprises which for various economic reasons have surplus labour at different times, and only on a voluntary basis.

The Committee would request the Government to provide samples of such agreements.

In relation to work in industry and building sites, the Committee referred to the enforcement of law, in particular section 31 of the Labour Code and section 133 of the Penal Code and also to questions raised in this connection as to the number of cases brought in the last years at the trade union's demand under section 133 of the Penal Code and as to the real power of the Chief Labour Inspector of the Regional Council of Trade Unions who could only impose a fine of 50 roubles and issue instructions for the elimination of the violation of labour legislation. The Committee expressed the hope that the Government would be in a position to supply full particulars on measures taken to ensure that penalties imposed by law for the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour are really adequate and are strictly enforced.

The Committee notes the Government's indication that penalties for infringement of labour legislation (administrative penalties in the form of fines under section 41 of the Code of Administrative Offences) have been strengthened by Act of 17 July 1992 which provides that fines for such offences, including section 41, are to be applied tenfold. The Committee also notes that a Bill to provide for an increase in the amount of the fine, including those under section 41, to up to ten times the minimum wage, is being prepared.

The Committee notes these indications with interest. It hopes that the Government will supply in its next report information on the action taken on this Bill. In addition, the Committee wonders whether pecuniary fines of the kind envisaged are really adequate to deter from the illegal exaction of forced labour, especially in times of inflation. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to give consideration to introducing into the Penal Code appropriate provisions to give effect to Article 25 of the Convention, and to report on any measures taken or contemplated to this end.

The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on proceedings engaged and on sanctions applied under section 133 of the Penal Code.