Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

Article 2(2)(a) of the Convention. Use of conscripts for non-military purposes. The Committee refers to its observation on this point made under Convention No. 105.

Article 2(2)(b). Work exacted as normal civic obligations of citizens. In its previous comments the Committee noted that, under article 18 of the Constitution of Turkey, the term “forced labour” does not include physical or intellectual work necessitated by the requirements of the country as a civic obligation. It requested the Government to specify the types of “physical or intellectual work” which may be exacted “as a civic obligation”.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that, under article 18 of the Constitution, civic obligations include military service, obligation to pay taxes, community cooperation, census and duty to assist in public elections. The Committee requests the Government to provide information regarding the abovementioned “community cooperation”, specifying any types of physical or intellectual work which may be exacted for this purpose, including information on the selection of participants, duration of the services and consultation with the local community or its representatives regarding the need for such services. Please also provide information regarding the possibility of refusal by the persons concerned to perform such services, including information on any sanctions applied in case of refusal.

Article 2(2)(c). Work of prisoners for private employers. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that there appeared to be no provisions in the Act on the Execution of Sentences and Security Measures (No. 5275 of December 2004) or in the corresponding regulations under which the employment of prisoners at private sector worksites is subject to their formal written consent.

The Committee recalls, referring also to paragraphs 59–60 and 114–117 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour, that in cases where work is performed for private enterprises, the worker’s consent needs to be authenticated, so as to ensure that it is free and informed, and the most reliable indicator of the voluntariness of labour and of freely given consent in such circumstances is work that is performed under conditions which approximate a free labour relationship. This, in turn, entails consideration of such factors as the wage levels, social security benefits, and occupational safety and health provisions of the employed prisoners and of how closely such conditions resemble those enjoyed by workers in the free labour market.

Referring to its observation under the Convention, the Committee notes the adoption of the Regulation on the Administration and Bidding of Penitentiaries and Work Centres of Detention Institutions in 2005 and the Regulation on Administration of Penitentiaries and Execution of Sentences in 2006, which govern the employment of prisoners.

While noting that, under the above regulations, prisoners’ conditions of work may be considered as approximating those of a free labour relationship, the Committee observes that, under the legislation in force, the informed, formal consent of prisoners to work for private enterprises does not appear to be asked for. The Committee asks the Government to indicate, in its next report, how the free and informed consent of prisoners to work for private companies is guaranteed free from the menace of any penalty, including the loss of rights or privileges.

Sentences of community work. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its earlier comments concerning the application of alternative sanctions of community work. It notes, in particular, the definition of “community service” given by the Constitutional Court, as well as the Government's detailed explanations in its report concerning the new Regulation for Probation and Help Services and Protection Boards, adopted in 2007, which provides for the methods and principles of application of the sentence of community work (sections 46–61).

Article 2(2)(d). Powers to call up labour in cases of emergency. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that, under article 18 of the Constitution of Turkey, the term “forced labour” does not include services required from citizens during a state of emergency, which may be declared, under article 119 of the Constitution, in the event, among other things, of a “serious economic crisis”. It had also noted that under the State of Emergency Act (No. 2935 of 1983), the Council of Ministers may issue decrees to determine obligations and measures to be taken in the event of serious economic crises, which may concern, inter alia, labour issues. The Committee has therefore requested the Government to limit the above provisions to a strict minimum allowed by the Convention, so that recourse to compulsory labour under emergency situations does not develop into mobilization for purposes of economic development.

The Committee notes the indication in the Government’s report that Turkey experienced economic crises in the past without, however, having any records of a state of emergency being declared as a consequence of it. It also notes the Government’s statement that no complaints regarding forced labour have been brought to the attention of the authorities either in periods of state of emergency or during economic crises.

The Committee further notes the Government’s information that the state of emergency referred to in the Constitution relates to exceptional conditions obstructing life in the country and that, even under these conditions, the reference to “all kinds of measures regarding working” does not allow for the exaction of forced labour, once article 18 of the Constitution explicitly prohibits forced labour. While noting these indications, the Committee recalls that the notion of “serious economic crises” does not seem to satisfy the criteria for the exception of “emergency situations” allowed under Article 2(2)(d) of the Convention and, therefore, requests the Government, once again, to take the necessary measures in order to limit the above provisions concerning the exaction of compulsory work or service in cases of emergency to a strict minimum allowed by the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the action taken to this end.

Article 2(2)(e). Minor communal services. The Committee previously noted that sections 12 and 13 of the Village Affairs Act No. 442, of 18 March 1924 provided for “mandatory works for villagers”. The Committee further noted the Government’s indication in its 2005 report that sections 12 and 13 of the Village Affairs Act were no longer applied in practice and that services such as building and repairing village roads were organized at the central or provincial government levels. It also noted the Government’s information that studies concerning the amendment of the Village Affairs Act were still being carried out and that the requirements of the Convention were to be taken into consideration in this reform process.

The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication in its 2007 report that the village services that did not qualify as “communal services” under the Village Affairs Act were, in fact, governed by the general management of village services (Law No. 3202 of 9 May 1985), which had been abolished by Law No. 5286 of 13 January 2005. The Committee also noted the Government’s statement that some services continued to be provided during a transitional period. Noting that the Government’s report contains no new information on this issue, the Committee requests the Government to provide, in its next report, updated information concerning communal services during the mentioned transitional period. Please also provide information as regards the amendment of the Village Affairs Act.