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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report contains no reply to its previous comments. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that the next report will include full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Article 1(c) of the Convention. Penal sanctions involving compulsory labour applicable to public officials for neglect of duty. Referring to its earlier comments, the Committee has noted the Government’s explanations concerning the interpretation of section 159(1) of the Penal Code, under which a public official who by negligence thwarts (foils) or makes substantially more difficult (obstructs) the execution of an important task shall be punishable with imprisonment (which involves compulsory prison labour, under the legislation on the execution of prison sentences). The Government indicates that section 159(1) is applicable only in serious cases of violation of a public officer’s obligations, such as foiling or substantial obstruction of a significant task related to the officer’s authoritative and decision-making power. The Committee has also noted the information on the application of section 159(1) in practice, including the information on the number of sentences of imprisonment pronounced in 2003–05 and extracts of two court decisions imposing sentences of imprisonment for acts which may amount to abuse of authority by police officers.

While having duly noted this information, the Committee observes that
section 159(1) of the Penal Code is worded in very general terms, broad enough to be likely to fall within the scope of the Convention. The Committee refers in this connection to the explanations contained in paragraphs 175–178 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, in which it considered that sanctions involving compulsory labour for breaches of labour discipline (including neglect of duty by public employees) may be compatible with the Convention only if such breaches impair or are liable to endanger the operation of essential services or which are committed either in the exercise of functions that are essential to safety or in circumstances where life or health are in danger. On the other hand, it may be recalled that, in so far as the labour discipline is concerned, it is always possible, without contravening the Convention, to have recourse to other disciplinary penalties, which do not include compulsory labour.

The Committee therefore reiterates its hope that measures will be taken, on the occasion of the future revision of the Penal Code, to amend section 159(1) so as to restrict its application to essential services in the strict sense of the term (that is, services, the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population) or, more generally, to circumstances where the life or health of persons are in danger. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide the information on the application of the above provision in practice, including copies of the relevant court decisions and indicating the penalties imposed.