Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

The Committee notes that no report has been received from the Government. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the following matters raised in its previous direct request:

1. Forced labour in cases of vagrancy. In its previous comments the Committee noted that pursuant to the Decree on vagrancy and begging of 23 May 1896 persons may be arrested, judged by a court and convicted of vagrancy or of begging. The court may decide to put them at the Government’s disposal for a certain period by placing them in an establishment. Able-bodied persons thus placed are forced to work in refuse collection, agriculture, maintenance, cleaning, construction of buildings or roads, or to perform other work in the general interest (section 7 of the General Government Order of 26 May 1913). In its last report the Government states that the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare submitted this matter for harmonization to the Monitoring Committee at the Ministry of Human Rights. The Committee notes this information. It recalls that the laws which oblige all able-bodied citizens to be gainfully employed or face legal penalties are incompatible with the Convention, and that the laws which define vagrancy in such general terms that they may serve directly or indirectly as a means of forcing persons to work should be amended so that only persons disturbing the public order who not only habitually refrain from working but are also without lawful means of subsistence should incur penalties. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures adopted further to the examination of the situation by the Monitoring Committee. Please indicate also whether the Decree on vagrancy and begging of 23 May 1896 is still in force and, if appropriate, to send a copy of any judgements referring to it.

2. Possibility for judges to resign. In its previous comments the Committee noted that under section 38 of Legislative Ordinance No. 88-056 of 29 September 1988 concerning the status of judges, judges’ resignations must be accepted by the President of the Republic. The Committee requested the Government to clarify whether the President could in practice refuse to accept a resignation and, if so, for what reasons. Noting that the Government indicates in its report that the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare has submitted this matter to the Ministry of Justice for further information, the Committee hopes that the Government’s next report will contain the clarifications requested.