Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2004, Publication: 92nd ILC session (2004)

A Government representative provided a detailed overview of the measures that had been taken to address the problem of child labour. The existence of child labour in Indonesia was, unfortunately, an inescapable reality caused by widespread poverty, lack of access to education, and the traditional perceptions that children were expected to help their parents in order to contribute to the family's economic well-being. The Government, nevertheless, was committed to ensuring that children were given the fullest protection. The recently adopted Act No. 13 on manpower clearly stated that children could work only if the work did not undermine their physical, mental and social development and health. Following this Act, the Indonesian Ministry of Manpower and Transmigration had published Minister's Decision No. 235/2003 regarding the types of work which were harmful to children's health, safety and mental well-being. This decision was also a follow-up to the implementation of ILO Convention No. 182 which Indonesia had ratified.

Turning to the question of jermals (fishing platforms), the speaker recalled that the Government and the ILO had signed a Memorandum of Understanding on the elimination of child labour in 1992. The Provincial Government of North Sumatra and the ILO-IPEC in Jakarta had recently signed a Letter of Agreement in April 2004 as an extension of the previous agreement signed in 2000. This Letter of Agreement laid down the second phase of the programme to eradicate children working on jermals by 2004. The first phase which started in 2000 had received positive recognition by the ILO in which the Provincial Government of North Sumatra was regarded as successful in reducing the problem of child workers in the province, particularly on jermals. According to the ILO-IPEC finding, since the beginning of the project in December 2000 until March 2004, 344 children were withdrawn and 2,111 children were prevented from working on jermals. Furthermore, a monitoring team had been established by the provincial Government which constantly monitored the activities of jermals, especially to prevent the use of child workers. It should also be noted that the provincial Government had been more restrictive in its licensing of jermals. Indeed, the total number of jermals had gone significantly down from the previous 450 to the current 124. Turning to the second phase set forth in the new Letter of Agreement, he noted that the primary objectives of this Agreement were: to remove children from jermal platforms and provide them with educational and other opportunities; to implement prevention, monitoring, withdrawal and rehabilitation strategies; to facilitate changes in community and family attitudes towards child labour, and to encourage replication of such strategies in other areas in Indonesia. The new Agreement also stressed tougher implementation of forced withdrawal of children working on jermals. In the first phase, immediate withdrawal was applied to jermal children under 15 years old. Now, children under the age of 18 should be immediately withdrawn, in line with the Minister's Decision No. 235 mentioned above. In implementing the programmes to eradicate child labour, the Ministry of Manpower had enjoined as many parties or stakeholders as possible, including the national police, its social partners, workers' and employers' organizations, NGOs and civil society.

Turning to the issue of trafficking in persons, the Government representative stated that the problem could not be separated from the issue of the placement of Indonesian migrant workers abroad. The Minister's Decision No. 104 A/Men/2002 provided a legal basis for the sending of Indonesian workers abroad which allowed both the Government and the private sector to undertake the sending of those workers. The provision, among others, stated that only after fulfilling certain criteria could private companies obtain an official permit (SIUP) to be involved in the sending of workers abroad. In order to further ensure compliance to existing regulations, the Government had reviewed their activities and imposed sanctions on those violating the rules. So far, 61 labour-sending companies (PJTKI) had been sanctioned and some 53 permits (SIUPs) had been withdrawn. Reasons for the withdrawal included substandard labour training houses and the use of fake vocational training certificates. The Ministry of Manpower and Transmigration, in cooperation with the national and provincial police, had also raided several migrant workers' training accommodation after receiving information from the public. Further, the Government was still in the process of implementing the Indonesian National Plan of Action for Human Rights of 2004-09, which included the programme to improve the integrated efforts for child protection from trafficking and sexual exploitation. The Indonesian national police had expanded some of its facilities to be able to deal with the crime of human trafficking in women and children. The Indonesian Government had also conducted some training programmes for labour inspectors, aimed at increasing their awareness of the issue of trafficking in persons. The Government was also working to strengthen data collection on trafficking cases, and was in the process of harmonizing national laws, in particular the Criminal Code and the Law on Immigration, which, among others, would also address the issue of trafficking in persons. Furthermore, the Government had concluded agreements with some receiving countries, and had also provided programmes to improve migrant workers' technical skills. The recruitment process also had to include psychological tests.

The Government also joined efforts with the international community in addressing the issue of trafficking. The Government had launched a regional initiative in cooperation with the Australian Government and co-hosted the Regional Ministerial Conference on People Smuggling and Trafficking in Persons in 2002 and 2003 with a view to enhancing regional cooperation and establishing a regional mechanism in combating trafficking in persons. Realizing the need for an improved protection of Indonesian migrant workers, the Government had prepared a draft law on the placement and protection of Indonesian migrant workers which included, inter alia, increasing the minimum age for working abroad and putting stricter requirements for permit applications. In order to combat trafficking in persons more effectively, the Government was in the process of finalizing a draft law on the eradication of people trading and trafficking in persons. In conclusion, he reiterated the commitment of the Government to eradicate forced labour and asked the international community, including the ILO, to continue to extend their assistance and cooperation.

The Worker members noted that the Government had not contested the information in the Committee of Expert's comments. They understood that poverty was a cause of child labour, but this should not prevent the Government from seriously addressing the issue. The Worker members asked for further details which the Government had not addressed. In particular, they wanted to know the estimated total number of children who were working on the jermal platforms and how far the Government had approached the goal of the total eradication of the problem, as we were already halfway through the year 2004. They also wanted more information on the legal measures that were being developed, in particular whether the draft Regulations mentioned in the Report of the Committee of Experts had already been adopted and applied in practice. It was also important to know how the jermal system would be monitored. Jermals were fairly easy to spot, and the Worker members requested more information on how they could be controlled. They also wanted to know more about law enforcement measures and penalties for crimes of forced labour. Declining numbers of child workers on jermals suggested that the Government was gradually coming to grips with the problem. Against that background it was strange that, apparently, no information at all was available on prosecutions and convictions of perpetrators.

With regard to trafficking of persons, the Worker members noted that a National Plan of Action for Human Rights had been established. They requested what the services established under the Plan had done so far and what results they had in fighting trafficking of persons. They also pointed out that prosecution of perpetrators was essential. They noted that the Indonesian police should be effective in dealing with those responsible for trafficking, given the efficiency with which they had arrested and locked up large numbers of alleged trade union troublemakers throughout the period of the Soeharto regime. Finally, they noted that the Memoranda of Understanding the Government had concluded with receiving countries of migrant workers did not contain clauses protecting workers' rights, as for example the very recent arrangement with Malaysia. The Memoranda of Understanding also excluded household workers. The lack of social protection in these agreements invited the exploitation of workers.

With regard to abuses in the practice of recruiting migrant workers, the Worker members noted that the Government had apparently not reacted in its report to the Committee of Experts to the allegations or provided additional information on this matter. It appeared that migrant workers were required to pass through recruiting agencies before being sent abroad, which often charged exorbitant fees up to thousands of US dollars, as revealed by the Indonesian Migrant Workers' Union and other organizations representing the interests of migrant workers. They asked if the fees were subject to legislation, and if there was a maximum legal fee. They observed that it appeared that the Government was co-responsible for the widespread malpractices as they required migrant workers to go through these agencies while failing to regulate or control their activities. The Government should review their legislation relevant to migrant workers and involve, in this process, not only employers' organizations and trade unions, but also migrant workers' unions and other organizations representing the interests of migrant workers. They should seek technical assistance of the ILO, including advice of the ILO on the possible ratification of the most important Migrant Workers' Conventions of the ILO and on the relevance of Convention No. 181 for the regulation of private employment agencies.

Finally, the Worker members recalled the problem of political prisoners, hundreds of thousands of whom were incarcerated after the 1965 failed coup attempt, the overwhelming majority without any trial. These so-called Tapols had been often subjected to forced labour. It was for that reason that the Committee had discussed their case repeatedly under Convention No. 29 in the late 1970s and early 1980s. When they were released and they returned to their villages or towns, they were often discriminated against on the basis of a special mark in their ID-cards and could not find work. Even today those still surviving had these problems. The Committee could not address this particular aspect of the case at the time because Indonesia had then not ratified Convection No. 111. Meanwhile it had, but to their dismay the Workers had found that the Committee of Experts in its report of this year had not mentioned this form of discrimination in employment and occupation in Indonesia. They hoped that now that Indonesia had ratified the Convention, it would provide the Committee with information on this matter.

The Employer members noted that this was a serious case dealing with different forms of forced labour, and that their position was close to that of the Worker members. With regard to forced labour of children on fishing platforms, they observed that this was extremely dangerous work. Recognizing that child labour was a consequence of poverty of families, they welcomed the actions taken in the framework of IPEC which had as its main objective to prevent child labour and to remove children working on the fishing platforms. They said that the data provided by the Government and contained in the report of the Committee of Experts required to be updated periodically in order to be apprised of current information on the extent to which children work on fishing platforms. With regard to the abduction of children, the Employer members thought that the situation remained quite unclear given that the Government representative had not provided information on this topic. They noted the indication of the Government representative to the effect that a new law was adopted prohibiting child labour and a draft law existed on the prohibition to employ children on fishing platforms. The Government should supply the texts of the above legal texts to the ILO indicating which of them were already in force. They also noted the statement of the Government representative that the collaboration of the central Government and IPEC would lead to a resolution of the problem in the course of 2004 as far as child labour on fishing platforms was concerned. They requested further information on the realistic chances to come to the resolution of that problem.

With regard to trafficking of persons, the Employer member noted that up to 25 per cent of migrant workers were concerned. According to the Government, the elimination of trafficking was not an easy task because it related to transnational crimes. Moreover, the professional competency of the officers responsible for combating trafficking needed to be improved. In this respect, the Employer members noted the National Plan of Action adopted in 2002 to combat trafficking in persons. They wondered whether the measures indicated therein were right and whether the measures would be taken in the right order. Therefore, they associated themselves with the Committee of Experts which had requested the Government to provide information on the measures taken under the plan and on their results. The Employer members recalled that the provisions under the penal code needed to be adopted, because the Convention expressly provided that the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour was punishable as a penal offence. Turning to ICFTU allegations concerning the requirement for migrant workers to go through recruitment agencies and the exploitation of migrant workers due to the absence of legislation laying down rights and regulating the labour migration process, the Employer members noted that the Committee of Experts had not expressed its position, but it had requested the Government to supply its response. However, the Government representative had not supplied substantial information on this matter. Therefore, the Government should provide this information in a detailed report which would constitute the basis for the assessment whether there was progress and which further measures needed to be taken in this respect.

The Government member of Cuba stated that the measures taken by the Government on the elimination of child labour on fishing platforms, including the adoption of Manpower Act No. 13/74, had contributed, as indicated by the Committee of Experts, to the reduction in the number of children working on fishing platforms. The Government had also been carrying out ILO programmes such as the one on the elimination of child labour, had submitted its first reports on the application of Convention No. 138 and had recently signed a protocol for the implementation of the second phase of the programme for the elimination of child labour on fishing platforms thereby demonstrating its good will. He affirmed that trafficking in persons had turned into a global and extremely complex scourge. It was clear that it was a phenomenon with different aspects. One such aspect was that traffickers took advantage of emigration. Neither laws nor administrative measures were sufficient to resolve it as it was necessary to address the problems of underdevelopment and the unjust economic and international trading system, which were behind the phenomenon and made it more acute. He stated that trafficking existed because there were traffickers and places which received and exploited trafficked persons. He maintained that if it was really intended to eliminate the phenomenon, this had to be done at both its place of origin and of destination. What were the destinations of the Indonesian migrant workers, women workers and children who were victims of trafficking, for prostitution and semi-slavery? He emphasized that the problem needed to be addressed in an integral manner. In this respect, he said that in the future he would like to see the analysis of the violation of Convention No. 29 in countries which received trafficked persons, since it was there that forced labour was really exacted. He referred to the measures adopted by the Government which, although they might be insufficient, served to show that, in addition to the political will shown by the Government, many other factors were also necessary, including: international cooperation from the ILO and all agencies involved in preventing and combating transnational organized crime and the political will of receiving States to reduce demand; the use of forced labour and to punish those who trafficked and exploited the victims of such forced labour. He concluded that Indonesia needed the continued technical assistance of the ILO in order to ensure the full application of the Convention and hoped that, in its future reports, it would be possible to note much more significant progress in the application of the Convention.

The Worker member of Japan noted that work on fishing platforms off the north-east coast of Sumatra was very dangerous and difficult. The workers were isolated 15-25 kilometres out to sea for three months at a time and faced accidents and drowning. They endured long workdays, sometimes up to 20 hours. For children, the situation was even worse. They were not only kidnapped and forced to work under extremely dangerous conditions, but faced physical and sexual abuse from their adult co-workers. There was no doubt that this kind of work counted among the worst forms of child labour under Convention No. 182. In this regard, she welcomed the adoption of the regulation on minimum age for admission to employment, which prohibited the employment of children in certain categories of work, including work on fishing platforms. Adopting the regulation was one thing; implementation, however, was quite another. She requested the Government of Indonesia to make every effort to fully implement this regulation, particularly with regard to notifications, inspections and the provision of sufficient financial resources. Moreover, she asked the Government to take all possible measures to bring an end to this hazardous work for children. She noted the letter of agreement signed between the Government of Sumatra and ILO/IPEC in April 2003. This project followed upon a similar initiative between 2000 and 2003 which was estimated to have withdrawn approximately 260 children from work on fishing platforms and prevented another 1,116 children from taking such jobs. She welcomed the report of the Government which showed that the project had brought about good results. Moreover, she asked the Government to take additional steps in collaboration with ILO/IPEC to eliminate child labour from the fishing platforms. She emphasized that all people, particularly children, had the absolute right to be educated and to develop their skills and realize their full potential. She requested that the Government accept the observations of the Committee of Experts and take all necessary measures immediately.

The Worker member of the Republic of Korea noted that, according to a series of interviews with Indonesian migrant workers in the Republic of Korea conducted by the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions, there were eight recruitment agencies that sent workers to the Republic of Korea. In order to become an industrial trainee in the Republic of Korea, Indonesians were required to sign contracts with these recruitment agencies and spend three to 12 months in training camps. As the Committee of Experts noted and as the interviews confirmed, these agencies charged extortionist amounts of training and processing fees. In the training camps, prospective migrant workers were forced to endure harsh, semi-military training such as marches or runs in the compound and repeated lifting of logs, among other practices. There were reportedly instances where those who were late for training sessions had been physically beaten. In comparison to such training courses, it was found that these agencies were in most cases unfit to provide education courses that would substantially help those migrant workers during their stay in the Republic of Korea, such as language or cultural education or training on the rights of industrial trainees in the Republic of Korea. According to the interviews, recruitment agencies required prospective migrant workers headed for the Republic of Korea to pay US$3,000 when they signed their contracts. Of this fee, US$750 to US$1,000 was received as a deposit, and was used to guarantee that prospective migrant workers were unable to leave their host country. If a migrant worker indeed left the company, the deposit was not returned. Unfortunately, around 50 per cent of all industrial trainees left their host country because of low wages, bad working conditions and discriminatory, sometimes abusive treatment in the Republic of Korea. This indicated a situation where migrants were trapped in a dilemma between enduring harsh and unjust conditions and losing their deposit in the hope of finding a better job elsewhere as undocumented workers. In either case, agencies profited at the expense of prospective migrant workers, which was the reason why many agencies deceived workers when describing the conditions of industrial trainees in the Republic of Korea. Moreover, some of the agencies forced prospective migrant workers to sign blank contracts just before departure. Most workers signed them because they had no negotiating power to insist upon the terms or conditions of their employment. The Indonesian Government required that migrants used the services of recruitment agencies although these agencies did not provide the necessary education to prospective migrant workers in the Republic of Korea and exposed them to abuse, exploitation and forced labour. While these interviews were not conclusive, they pointed to a strong need for a comprehensive survey and review of migration processes for Indonesians from the perspective of labour and human rights. The speaker urged the regulation and monitoring of recruitment agencies and training camps in order for measures to be taken to rectify such practices.

The Government member of Pakistan declared that it was heartening that the Government of Indonesia had taken note of the situation and had enacted legislative provisions to provide protection to workers. The labour laws of Indonesia prohibited the employment of children in the worst forms of child labour, including work on fishing platforms, and a large number of children had either been withdrawn or had been prevented from engaging in such forms of work. These children were being provided with education, vocational training or were being rehabilitated by other means. He expressed appreciation for the assistance provided by the ILO to the Government through ILO/IPEC in its efforts to eliminate the menace of forced labour, particularly in relation to children. He also welcomed the fact that the Government, in collaboration with the ILO, had developed a programme for the immediate withdrawal of children under the age of 18 years from the worst forms of work. While appreciating the Government's efforts to combat the trafficking of women and children, he urged the Government to accelerate its efforts for the total eradication of trafficking in persons.

The Worker member of Indonesia noted that difficulties remained with respect to migrant workers and trafficking in persons in Indonesia, even though the Government introduced Presidential Decree No. 88/2000 along with other measures. Yet the facts demonstrated that eradication of these problems was still far from attained and many obstacles remained. His union, the SBSI recently visited three cities in Sumatra to investigate the issue of migrant workers and trafficking in persons. Through interviews with local government officials, recruitment agencies, unions and workers, the SBSI found that it was difficult to combat trafficking because some recruitment agencies sent migrant workers abroad with fake documentation. In fact, many workers did not have identity cards. One agency, for example, even falsified the age, name, address and marital status of the workers. As a result, many workers were transported by illegal means in order to avoid government and police border controls and to minimize travel costs. In the city of Tanjung Balai, at least one boat left illegally every week with 10-20 passengers headed for Malaysia and Singapore. Upon arrival in the host country, workers feared taking jobs in the formal sector and some fell into prostitution because they did not know where to find work. This was a particular problem in Indonesia because there were numerous transit border islands and massive unemployment. The speaker thanked the Government for revoking the licences of some illegal agencies, even though many more agencies continued to operate with impunity. Another obstacle was the inability of local governments to address the problem because of a lack of coordination between them. For instance, even if the authorities could abolish the production of fraudulent identity cards, it would nonetheless be impossible to stop trafficking if police border controls remained weak. With respect to the Government's recent action plan to combat trafficking in persons, he requested that unions be consulted. This would give them the opportunity to contribute to eradicating the problem and more importantly would allow them to keep track of the number of cases that had been dealt with, how many persons had been punished and the proposed plan for tackling the problem. The Government should make every effort to hasten the adoption of the draft law on the placement of migrant workers abroad which was submitted to Parliament one year ago. Because this was a multifaceted issue, Presidential Decree No. 88/2000 was not sufficient to address all the potential problems that would arise in the future. He suggested that the Government should adopt comprehensive national legislation based on international standards for the protection of migrant workers. In conclusion, he supported the recommendations submitted to the ILO by the Indonesian Migrant Workers' Union.

The Government member of Bangladesh, referring to the statement made by the Government representative concerning forced labour on fishing platforms in north Sumatra, welcomed the ongoing close cooperation between the Government of Indonesia and the Office, towards the elimination of child labour. In this context, the signing of a Letter of Agreement in April 2004, between the Indonesian authority and the ILO was also to be welcomed. He pointed out that since the beginning of the programme in December 2000, good progress had been achieved in reducing the number of children working and preventing them from working in the jermals. This showed the commitment of the Indonesian Government in eliminating child labour from that country. He expressed the hope that the ILO would continue to provide the necessary assistance and support to the Government to redress the problem of child labour in the country.

The Government representative indicated that, following the ratification of Convention No. 182, a national action plan had been developed for the elimination of the worst forms of child labour. Under the terms of the decrees adopted for this purpose, those who were found guilty of violating the provisions on the forced labour of children, including on fishing platforms, were liable to sentences of imprisonment of from two to five years. Indonesia was also participating in an ILO programme to combat the trafficking of workers, with particular reference to the problem of forced domestic work, as well as in a special action programme under the ILO Declaration which was in its preliminary stages and was currently focusing on the assessment of the situation. She added that the Memorandum of Understanding that had been concluded with Malaysia consisted of the renewal of a previous Memorandum of Understanding covering workers in the formal sector. Discussions were under way with a view to the extension of the Memorandum of Understanding to informal workers. Finally, she added that the fees that were payable by migrant workers to recruitment agencies covered certain costs, including transport, medical examinations and the actual fees of the agencies involved. These were paid back once employment had been taken up, in accordance with normal practice for such agencies and in line with the provisions of the Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181). She also invited the Worker member of the Republic of Korea to assist in assessing the situation of migrant workers from Malaysia who were employed by companies in the Republic of Korea.

The Worker members expressed disappointment with the reaction of the Government representative to the discussion, during which many questions had been raised. In particular, the Government representative had not provided any information on the measures taken to prosecute those who were responsible for the imposition of forced labour. It was therefore to be hoped that the Government would take measures to address this matter. With regard to the Memorandum of Understanding which had been concluded with Malaysia, the Worker members noted that it did not appear to cover the rights of migrant workers. They raised the question of whether Indonesia had concluded other such agreements with third countries which also failed to cover the situation of migrant workers. The Worker members called upon the Government to provide full information on the three matters raised by the Committee of Experts. They also hoped that in its next report the Government would provide full and practical information on the prosecution and punishment of cases of violations of the Convention. With regard to the need to review the legislation that was in place, the Worker members understood that the Government had recently adopted some legislation. However, they recalled that, as indicated by the Committee of Experts and illustrated during the discussions, much remained to be done in this respect in terms of a thorough review of the applicable legislation. They added that the Government bore a heavy responsibility for the situation of migrant workers by requiring them to go through recruitment agencies, but failing to regulate these agencies adequately. Finally, the Worker members emphasized that, when preparing legislation on the issues under discussion, the Government should ensure the involvement of all the parties concerned, including employers' and workers' organizations, organizations representing migrant workers and NGOs involved in assisting migrant workers. It should also seek the ILO's assistance and should examine carefully the possibility of ratifying the ILO's major Conventions on migrant workers. As it claimed that it had developed rules which were adapted from the Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181), it should also examine the possibility of ratifying that Convention. When Indonesia concluded bilateral agreements on issues of migration with other countries, it should ensure that they covered the rights of all the workers concerned in an adequate manner.

The Employer members noted the very detailed discussions concerning an important case which gave grounds for concern. Although some new information had been provided, it was still not entirely clear what the real situation was. They therefore urged the Government to provide copies of all the relevant legislative texts, both those that were in force and draft legislation, as well as information on planned administrative measures, so that a clearer picture could be obtained of the situation. They further requested the Government to report on the practical impact of the laws and administrative measures adopted up to now. A very complete report would therefore be required on the matters raised by the Committee of Experts as soon as possible.

The Committee noted the information provided by the Government representative and the debate that followed. The Committee noted with concern that the issues raised by the Committee of Experts related to grave situations of the trafficking in persons, forced labour by children on fishing platforms and the exploitation of migrant workers under forced labour conditions by recruitment agencies. The Committee noted the statements made by the Government representative concerning Manpower Act No. 13/74 and the action taken to prevent the employment of children on fishing platforms and on the linkages between the situation of migrant workers and trafficking. The Government representative had also referred to the National Plan of Action for the promotion of human rights and to the Memoranda of Understanding concluded with countries of destination. With reference to forced labour of children on fishing platforms, the Committee noted with concern the persistence of the practice of employing children in this dangerous work, in which the children could not give their consent or leave the work if they so wished. Allegations also continued to be made of the forced recruitment of children. Such practices occurred in spite of the agreement signed between the provincial government of North Sumatra and IPEC which provided for the complete elimination of child labour on fishing platforms by 2004. The Committee also noted with concern that the Act on the trafficking in persons had not yet been adopted. Taking into account the magnitude of the phenomenon, which concerned women and children in particular, and the need to punish the persons who were responsible for such trafficking, the Committee expressed the hope that the new legislation would be adopted in agreement with the social actors, trade unions and organizations of migrant workers, and with ILO technical assistance, and that the Government would also be in a position to provide information on its application in practice. The Committee urged the Government to take strong measures, proportional to the magnitude and gravity of the problems examined, particularly to impose sanctions on those responsible for practices of forced labour. The Committee expressed the hope that the Government would provide detailed information in its next report, especially on the conditions of work of migrant workers, placed by recruitment agencies and on the bilateral agreements concluded, which needed to protect the rights of migrant workers.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention.  1. Trafficking in persons. In its previous observation the Committee, noting the persistence of the practice of trafficking in persons in Indonesia, and the gravity and extent of the phenomenon, expressed the hope that the Government would provide detailed information concerning its efforts to combat this problem, particularly with regard to prevention and protection measures and to the punishment of perpetrators.

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report concerning the implementation of the National Plan of Action for the Elimination of Trafficking in Women and Children, and, in particular, the information on the prevention and protection measures, law enforcement, as well as intersector and intergovernmental coordination and cooperation. The Committee notes the “challenges” in relation to efforts in Indonesia to combat trafficking in persons, which the Government identified in its national report submitted in March 2008 to the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review of the UN Human Rights Council (A/HRC/WG.6/1/IDN/1). The Committee hopes that the Government will provide more specific and detailed information about task forces required to be set up under section 58(2) and (3) of Law No. 21/2007 to implement policies, programmes, and activities to prevent trafficking in persons, particularly at the regional (provincial and district) and municipal levels of government, including information about their operation and functioning and the amount and adequacy of budgetary allocations they receive, and, in general, information about the attention being paid to the problem of trafficking at that level of government.

The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report on recent law enforcement efforts, including the references to judicial cases involving the arrest, prosecution and punishment of perpetrators. The Committee hopes that the Government will continue to provide information about the judicial proceedings instituted under Law No. 21/2007, as well as, more generally, information regarding the enforcement by police and judicial authorities of criminal provisions relating to trafficking in persons, including statistics about prosecutions, convictions and sentences imposed.

The Committee notes the reference in the Government’s report to Decree No. 10 of July 2007 of the Chief of the Indonesian National Police, issued under section 45 of Law No. 21/2007 in relation to establishment of “special service rooms” in local police stations in every province and city to protect victims of trafficking and to examine witnesses in trafficking investigations. The Government also refers to Regulation No. 9/2008 promulgated under section 46(2) of Law No. 21/2007 on the establishment of “integrated service centers” in every city and regency to protect victims and witnesses in trafficking cases. The Committee also notes the reference to an undated multi-stakeholder initiative that entails disseminating information to and sensitizing prosecutors regarding Law No. 21/2007. The Committee hopes that the Government will continue to provide information about the operation and functioning of these special service units, particularly their use in criminal investigations and witness protection programmes, and that it will also supply copies of the provisions referred to above. The Committee repeats its request for information on the operation of the Witness and Victim Protection Institution (LPSK), including a copy of the annual report which the LPSK is required to submit to the House of Representatives under article 13(2) of Law No. 13/2006.

2. Vulnerable situation of Indonesian migrant workers with regard to the illegal exaction of forced labour. In its previous observation the Committee noted, inter alia, that Law No. 39/2004 on the placement and protection of Indonesian workers abroad does not appear to provide effective protection for migrant workers against the risks of exploitation due to its vague provisions and its numerous shortcomings and that, despite these and other measures adopted by the Government, many Indonesian workers continue to turn to illegal networks, thereby increasing the risk of exploitation. The Committee hopes that the Government will provide detailed information on tangible measures it is taking to improve the protection of Indonesian migrant workers against exploitation and the imposition of forced labour, both in Indonesia and following their departure abroad.

The Committee notes the references in the Government’s report to the issuance of several legal provisions to implement Law No. 39/2004, including: Presidential Decree No. 81/2006 (and the establishment under that Decree of a coordinating body, the National Board for the Placement and Protection of Indonesian Overseas Workers (BNP2TKI)); Presidential Instruction No. 6/2006 on reform of the policy on the protection and placement of Indonesian workers abroad; and Decree No. 18/2007 of the Ministry of Manpower and Transmigration. The Government refers to several measures taken pursuant to Presidential Instruction No. 6/2006, including: the establishment of citizens’ advisory services in six destination countries; allocations made under the state budget to “Indonesian Labour” to subsidize the printing of “overseas workers cards” and the costs of pre- and post-departure training programmes; and the establishment of “integrated service rooms” at airport gates. The Committee also notes the Government’s reference to the increased number of Indonesian labour attachés assigned to destination countries.

The Committee notes that the measures noted above appear to place greater emphasis on addressing the shortcomings of worker placement and placement-related procedures than on worker protections. The Committee therefore hopes that the Government will provide greater information about the protective aspects of the provisions noted above and about the measures being taken to implement them, and that it will also supply copies of those provisions. The Committee would be grateful for more specific information about the activities of the National Board for the Placement and Protection of Indonesian Overseas Workers as they relate to the protection of Indonesian migrant workers. Please also provide more detailed information about measures being taken or contemplated to protect Indonesian migrant workers by way of controlling the exploitative aspects of activities of private recruitment agencies including their fee-charging practices. The Committee hopes that the Government will continue to report on all measures being taken or envisaged to overcome the shortcomings of the legislation in force, particularly Law No. 39/2004.

In its previous observation the Committee noted that the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) concluded with the Government of Malaysia in May 2006 does not guarantee standard labour protections; does not include measures to prevent and respond to cases of abuse; and contains provisions that contribute to maintaining Indonesian migrant workers in situations of great vulnerability, particularly through its authorization for employers to confiscate and hold workers’ passports. The Committee notes with concern that in its latest report the Government, in referring to this authorization under the MoU, appears to justify the practice as having a protective purpose and as benefiting the workers concerned, and it also refers to a makeshift programme involving the printing of a worker ID card “as a passport substitute”. The Committee hopes that the Government will take steps without delay to amend its MoU with the Government of Malaysia to prohibit employer withholding of worker passports, to eliminate all other restrictions on the fundamental rights of domestic and other migrant workers, to guarantee standard labour protections, and to provide for measures to prevent and respond to cases of worker abuse. The Committee trusts that the Government will ensure that similar safeguards and protections are included in all other such bilateral agreements, including the 13 agreements referred to by the Government in its report. The Committee would be grateful for information from the Government in its next report indicating the progress made, as well as copies of all memoranda of understanding it refers to in its report.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

While noting the Government’s report, the Committee regrets that it only provides very brief replies to the many issues raised in its previous observation. The Committee recalls that its comments concerned the trafficking in persons and the exploitation of migrant workers. With regard to the issue of forced labour by children on fishing platforms, the Committee refers to the observation that it is making in relation to the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182).

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. 1. Trafficking in persons for exploitation. In its two previous observations, the Committee referred to the observations made by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), which has since become the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), containing worrying information on the trafficking in persons, particularly for the purpose of prostitution. The ITUC indicated that 20 per cent of the 5 million Indonesian migrant workers were reported to be victims of trafficking. The Government recognized the phenomenon and had taken a certain number of measures to combat it. At the 92nd Session of the International Labour Conference in June 2004, the problem was examined by the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards during the discussion on the application of the Convention by Indonesia. The Government provided certain information on that occasion, as well as in its subsequent report. The Committee noted all this information and observed with interest that the Government, which is aware of the importance of the problem of the trafficking in persons, was continuing to adopt awareness-raising, prevention and repressive measures, particularly through the reinforcement of the capacities of the police and labour inspectors, regional cooperation and ILO technical assistance. The Committee nevertheless requested the Government to provide more concrete and detailed information, particularly on the assessment of the scope and nature of the phenomenon of trafficking, the penalties imposed and the results achieved in practice through the action carried out in the context of the National Action Plan for Abolishing Woman and Child Trafficking, adopted in December 2002.

In its report provided in August 2006, the Government refers to certain measures that it has taken to combat trafficking, such as sending inspectors to the points of entry into the country of migrant workers, as well as lawyers and police liaison officers to certain countries of destination of victims of trafficking. According to the Government, results have been achieved in practice. However, the Committee notes that the Government has not provided any information on the assessment by the Government as to the extent and nature of the phenomenon of trafficking. With regard to the penalties imposed, the Government indicates that it has attached to its report examples of court rulings. However, the Committee notes that the Government’s report only contains a list of seven cases, without dates or references to the courts which ruled on the cases.

The Committee notes with interest the adoption of Law No. 21/2007 of 19 April 2007 on the elimination of the crime of human trafficking. It notes that the Law establishes penalties of from three to 15 years of imprisonment and fines of between 120 million and 600 million Rupiahs (articles 2–6), which may be supplemented by one third in certain aggravating circumstances such as causing serious injury or serious mental disorder (article 7(1)), where the crime of trafficking is committed by a state administrator (article 8), by an organized band (article 16) or where the victim is a child under 18 years of age (article 17). In the event of the death of the victim, the penalty is between a minimum of five years’ imprisonment and a maximum of life imprisonment (article 7(2)). The Committee further notes that the Law establishes penalties for the crime of trafficking in human beings when it is committed by a corporation through sentences of imprisonment and fines against its executives, combined with additional penalties such as revoking the business licence, confiscating assets resulting from the crime and prohibiting the executives from establishing a corporation in the same field (article 15). Articles 19–24 provide for sentences of imprisonment and fines for related crimes, such as the falsification of documents with a view to facilitating the trafficking in human beings, inciting a witness to commit perjury and revealing the identity of witnesses or victims. The consent of the victim is not a ground for abandoning proceedings against those responsible for the crime of the trafficking in human beings (article 26).

The Committee further notes other provisions of the Law: articles 43–55 which relate to the protection of witnesses and victims of the trafficking in human beings; articles 56–58 concerning the preventive measures that are to be adopted at the regional and national levels to combat trafficking; and article 59 respecting international cooperation in the field of trafficking. The Committee also notes the provisions of Law No. 13/2006 on the protection of witnesses and victims. It further notes that a technical cooperation programme with the ILO was established in September 2006 for two years to combat forced labour and the trafficking of Indonesian migrant workers.

The Committee notes the efforts made by the Government, particularly with regard to the adoption of legislation to combat the trafficking in human beings. In view of the persistence of the practice of trafficking in Indonesia, and the gravity and extent of the phenomenon, as illustrated by many sources, the Committee considers that the Government needs to redouble its efforts to combat trafficking and to take the appropriate measures to ensure the effective application of the legislation. The Committee emphasizes the need to take action both to reinforce prevention and to impose penalties for this crime, and also emphasizes the importance of adopting measures to assess the extent and nature of the phenomenon of trafficking. It regrets that the Government has not provided fuller information in this respect. The Committee trusts that the Government will provide detailed information in its next report, particularly with regard to:

–           the measures adopted or envisaged for the prevention of trafficking, and particularly the programmes and policies formulated under article 57 of Law No. 21/2007, the activities of the various task groups envisaged by article 58(2) and (3), and the measures adopted or envisaged under article 59 in the field of international cooperation to combat trafficking;

–           the measures taken in accordance with Article 25 of the Convention to ensure that the penalties envisaged by the national legislation are really adequate and are strictly enforced, including information on the charges brought for trafficking, the prosecutions initiated against those responsible for this crime and the penalties imposed (please provide copies of court rulings issued under Law No. 21/2007);

–           the measures for the protection of witnesses and victims of trafficking adopted under Law No. 21/2007 and Law No. 13/2006 respecting the protection of witnesses and victims of trafficking, the operation of the Witness and Victim Protection Institution (LPSK), including a copy of the periodical report that the LPSK has to submit every year as a minimum to the House of Representatives under article 13(2) of Law No. 13/2006.

2. Vulnerable situation of Indonesian migrant workers with regard to the illegal exaction of forced labour. In its previous observations, the Committee noted the particularly worrying conditions in which Indonesian migrant workers are exploited in various countries, based on the comments provided by the ICFTU (currently the ITUC) in 2003 and 2004. The main problems concerned the need to go through recruitment agencies and the absence of legislation establishing the rights of Indonesian migrant workers and regulating the process of migration for employment, with these factors facilitating the exploitation of such workers. The Committee also noted the abusive practices of certain recruitment agencies throughout the recruitment process and during the period for which migrant workers are in the country of destination. In this respect, the Committee observes that these agencies charge migrant workers exorbitant enrolment and training fees, thereby obliging them to take on a substantial debt which places them in a situation of vulnerability from the outset to exploitation and forced labour. Recruitment agencies force workers to live in training camps, sometimes for up to 14 months, where they may be deprived of freedom of movement and forced to work free of charge for recruitment agency staff. Then, once they have arrived in their country of destination, migrant workers have to reimburse the debt to the agency which recruited them, by paying back several months’ wages, with the result that they work for long periods without pay.

In reply, the Government accepted that the recruitment of Indonesian migrant workers came under its responsibility and it provided information on the legal provisions regulating recruitment agencies. It acknowledged that abuses could occur throughout the recruitment process and indicated that it therefore supervises the activities of recruitment agencies and imposes sanctions on those which do not comply with the regulations. It further indicated that it is aware of the lack of bargaining power of migrant workers and for this reason is seeking to improve their conditions through the conclusion of protocol agreements with host countries. While welcoming the Government’s initiatives, the Committee requested it to continue providing information, particularly on:

–           the nature of the supervision carried out on the activities of placement agencies on the national territory, particularly with regard to the verification of placement agreements and employment contracts and compliance with their terms, the cost of placement actually borne by the worker, the training provided, the living conditions in training centres and dormitories and waiting periods;

–           the means available to the Ministry of Manpower and Transmigration to carry out these controls;

–           the nature of the infringements reported, court decisions and the penalties imposed;

–           the facilities provided (assistance, redress mechanisms, etc.) to Indonesian migrant workers who are exploited in host countries and the protocol agreements signed with these countries.

In its report provided in August 2006, the Government indicates that it is taking measures in the field of labour inspection to ensure compliance with the legislation. The contracts signed by migrant workers have to be notified to labour inspectors and officers of the Board for the Placement and Protection of Indonesian Workers. Controls are carried out of recruitment agencies and administrative penalties up to the withdrawal of licences are imposed in the event of violations. Moreover, controls are carried out at the places of embarkment of migrant workers. Furthermore, in certain countries, attachés are assigned to embassies with responsibility for social affairs to provide assistance to migrant workers and control recruitment agencies.

The Committee notes the adoption of Law No. 39/2004 on the placement and protection of Indonesian workers abroad and the Regulation of the Minister of Manpower and Transmigration No. PER.19/MEN/V/2006 of 12 May 2006 on the placement and protection of Indonesian workers abroad. The Committee notes that under article 5 of Law No. 39/2004, the Government shall regulate and supervise the placement and protection of migrant workers, while part of its authorities and/or duties may be delegated to regional governments. Under article 7(c), the Government has to establish and develop a system of information on the placement of migrant workers. With regard to the enrolment and training fees that recruitment agencies impose upon migrant workers at the outset, the Committee notes that article 76 of the Law provides that private placement operators for Indonesian workers may only impose costs in relation to the arrangement of personal identity documents, medical examinations, training and certification of competence. By virtue of this article, the components of these costs have to be transparent. However, article 34 of Regulation No. PER.19/MEN/V/2006 adds new components to the costs which may be charged by agencies to migrant workers, including the costs of accommodation and subsistence during the period when the worker is lodged by the agency. Under articles 94 and 95 of Law No. 39/2004, placement and protection agencies for Indonesian workers are responsible for the implementation of policies on the placement and protection of Indonesian workers abroad. The Law also contains provisions relating, inter alia, to rights and obligations, insurance, accommodation, repatriation, the protection of Indonesian migrant workers, among others, by Indonesian embassies, the settlement of disputes which may arise between a worker and a placement agency and the administrative and criminal sanctions which may be imposed on individuals and corporations for violations of the provisions of the Law.

The Committee also notes the study entitled “Using Indonesian law to protect and empower Indonesian migrant workers: Some lessons from the Philippines”, published in June 2006 by the ILO Office in Jakarta in the context of the ILO project on mobilizing action for the protection of domestic workers from forced labour and trafficking in South-East Asia under the Special Action Programme on Forced Labour (SAP-FL). According to the study, although Law No. 39/2004 contains some provisions that are favourable to migrant workers, it nevertheless has serious shortcomings, such as the focus on the placement of migrant workers rather than on their protection. The study concludes that this Law lacks clarity on several issues, such as the attribution of responsibility for the enforcement of migrant workers’ rights. But the weakest aspect of the Law is that its enforcement has been minimal if not non-existent.

Finally, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report concerning the preparation of a draft Memorandum of Understanding with the Government of Malaysia on the recruitment and placement of domestic workers. It notes that the report of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, dated 2 March 2007 (A/HRC/4/24/Add.3), refers to a Memorandum of Understanding on domestic migrant workers concluded with Malaysia on 13 May 2006 in Bali (paragraph 36 of the report). According to this report, the Memorandum of Understanding covers procedural matters regarding recruitment, but makes little mention of employees’ rights (paragraph 37). Moreover, it leaves migrants in a vulnerable situation as it does not guarantee standard labour protections, nor does it include measures to prevent and respond to cases of abuse. Appendix A.xii of the Memorandum of Understanding, entitled “Responsibilities of the Employer”, provides that the employer shall be responsible for the safekeeping of the domestic worker’s passport and surrender such passport to the Indonesian mission in the event of abscondment or death of the domestic worker (paragraph 38). The Memorandum of Understanding also contains many restrictions on the fundamental rights of domestic workers. According to the report, the Memorandum of Understanding may end up encouraging irregular migration because of the long, complicated and expensive documentation process (paragraph 40). In conclusion, the Special Rapporteur indicates that the provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding do not meet international labour standards, especially regarding the right of workers to hold their own passports. The authorization for employers to hold workers’ passports makes it difficult for workers to leave abusive conditions or to negotiate better working conditions and full payment of their wages, and also contributes to the creation of networks of traffickers in persons, forced labour and undocumented migration (paragraph 64).

The Committee notes all this information. It recognizes that the Government has adopted measures intended to improve the protection of migrant workers against exploitation and the imposition of forced labour, both before and after their departure abroad, particularly through the adoption of a Law intended to guarantee their rights and control the activities of recruitment agencies. However, this Law does not appear to provide effective protection for migrant workers against the risks of exploitation due to its vague provisions and its numerous shortcomings. The information available to the Committee shows that, despite the measures adopted, many Indonesian workers continue to turn to illegal networks, thereby increasing the risk of exploitation. Furthermore, with regard to domestic workers, who account for a large proportion of Indonesian migrant workers, the Committee notes that the Memorandum of Agreement signed with Malaysia, which is later than the adoption of the Law on the placement and protection of Indonesian workers abroad, contains provisions that contribute to maintaining these workers in a situation of great vulnerability, particularly through the authorization of the employer to keep their passports. The Committee is all the more concerned at the situation as the Ministry of Manpower and Transmigration has announced the objective of sending 1 million Indonesian workers abroad per year until 2009 (see page 7 of the study by the ILO Jakarta Office referred to above). In this context, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed and tangible information on the measures that it is continuing to take to improve the protection of Indonesian migrant workers against exploitation and the imposition of forced labour, both in Indonesia and following their departure abroad, particularly with regard to:

–           measures to overcome the shortcomings of the legislation that is in force;

–           controls over the activities of recruitment agencies and on the fees that they charge migrant workers, in view of the fact that the debt taken on by many of these workers is one of the major causes of their exploitation;

–           assistance to migrant workers who are victims of exploitation, including clandestine migrant workers;

–           the memoranda of understanding signed with the host countries of Indonesian workers; and

–           the penal sanctions imposed in accordance with Article 25 of the Convention on individuals and associations guilty of having imposed forced labour and the legal proceedings that are currently under way.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

With reference to its previous observation, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government in March 2004 in reply to the comments made by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) concerning the exploitation of Indonesian migrant workers. It also notes the information provided by the Government during the discussion on the application of the Convention in the Committee on the Application of Standards of the International Labour Conference in June 2004, the Government’s report received in August 2004 and the new comments made by the ICFTU in August 2004, a copy of which was forwarded to Government on 2 September 2004.

1. Forced labour of children on fishing platforms. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the action taken to eradicate work by children on fishing platforms (jermals) and on the results achieved in practice through this action. Noting that the Government has ratified the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182), and provided reports on its application, the Committee requests it to refer to the comments that it is making on the application of that Convention. Indeed, as Convention No. 182 provides in Article 3(a) that the worst forms of child labour include "all forms of slavery or practices similar to slavery, such as the sale and trafficking of children, debt bondage and serfdom and forced or compulsory labour", the Committee considers that the problem of the forced labour of children on fishing platforms may be examined more specifically in the context of Convention No. 182.

2. Trafficking of persons. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the observations made by the ICFTU indicating that the trafficking of persons, including for the purpose of forced prostitution, is widespread in Indonesia and that many migrants should be considered as victims of trafficking, with as many as 20 per cent of the 5 million Indonesian migrant workers being victims of trafficking. It noted in this respect the measures adopted by the Government to combat this phenomenon, including: the formulation of Bills on trafficking-related crimes; the establishment of 200 special centres and 19 integrated service centres to combat the trafficking of persons; the action taken by the police to prevent and combat the phenomenon; and the adoption on 30 December 2002 of the National Action Plan for Abolishing Woman and Child Trafficking. The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the adoption of the Bills for the prevention and repression of the trafficking of persons, the measures taken in the context of the National Action Plan for Abolishing Woman and Child Trafficking, the results obtained in combating the trafficking of persons in general (as women and children are the only categories covered by the Action Plan) and any legal proceedings initiated with a view to penalizing those responsible for trafficking.

During the discussion of the application of the Convention by Indonesia in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards and in its report submitted subsequently, the Government has provided certain information on this subject:

-  the implementation of the National Plan of Action for Human Rights, 2004-09, which includes a programme to improve the integrated efforts for child protection from trafficking and sexual exploitation;

-  the reinforcement of the national police so that it is better able to deal with the crime of the trafficking of women and children;

-  the organization by the Ministry of Manpower and Transmigration of workshops to raise the awareness and train labour inspectors from various provinces and officials responsible for the enforcement of labour legislation so that they can address matters related to trafficking at the workplace with a view to its prevention;

-  the launching of a regional initiative in cooperation with the Government of Australia and the hosting of the Regional Ministerial Conference on People Smuggling and Trafficking in Persons in 2002 and 2003 with a view to enhancing regional cooperation and establishing a regional mechanism to combat trafficking in persons;

-  the continued updating of data on cases of trafficking, which is essential for the formulation of effective policies and programmes in this field;

-  the continuation of the process of harmonizing the legislation, particularly the Criminal Code and the law on immigration, with a view to including provisions on the trafficking in persons, and the finalization of the draft law on the eradication of people trading and trafficking in persons; and

-  in the context of collaboration with the ILO, participation in a project designed to address in particular the problems encountered by Indonesian domestic workers, including trafficking (the project on "Mobilizing Action to Protect Domestic Workers from Forced Labour and Trafficking").

The Committee notes all of this information and observes with interest that the Government, which is aware of the importance of the problem of trafficking in persons, is continuing to adopt awareness-raising, prevention and repression measures, particularly through the reinforcement of the capacities of the police and labour inspectors, regional cooperation and ILO technical assistance. Nevertheless, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide more concrete and detailed information, with particular reference to the following points:

-  assessing the scope and nature of the phenomenon of trafficking: the Committee hopes that the collection of data, to which the Government refers in its report, will mean that information becomes available on the number of persons concerned (men, women, children), the different forms of trafficking (national and transnational), the categories of workers concerned, etc., which will assist the Government in targeting the measures to be taken and assessing their effectiveness;

-  the penalties imposed: the Committee notes that the Government has not provided any information on the judicial proceedings initiated against those responsible for trafficking, nor the penalties imposed. In this respect, it notes that the draft law on trafficking in persons, to which the Government was already referring in 2003, has still not been adopted. The Government should take all the necessary measures rapidly to ensure that the legislation includes a full text defining trafficking in persons, providing for effective and dissuasive penal sanctions and containing provisions on the protection of victims and their compensation. The adoption of a text explicitly defining and penalizing trafficking would make it possible to resolve the shortcomings of the legislation in this field and would constitute an important stage in combating the trafficking in persons. In the meantime, the Committee notes that courts are nevertheless able to judge those responsible for trafficking based on other legal provisions, such as section 297 of the Penal Code, under which those responsible for the trafficking of women and boys are liable to a sentence of imprisonment of a maximum of six years, and the provisions of the Penal Code regarding sexual exploitation, as well as by penalizing failure to comply with the labour legislation (hours of work, working conditions, etc.). As Article 25 of the Convention provides that the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour shall be punishable by penalties that are really adequate, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the complaints lodged for trafficking, the judicial proceedings initiated against the perpetrators, the penalties imposed, with copies of the relevant decisions, and the protection afforded to the victims;

-  the practical results achieved through the action carried out in the context of the National Action Plan for Abolishing Woman and Child Trafficking, adopted in December 2002. In this respect, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the fact that the measures that it has announced do not appear to cover male victims.

3. Exploitation of migrant workers. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide full information in reply to the comments made by the ICFTU on the exploitation of migrant workers. The requirement for migrants to go through recruitment agencies and the absence of legislation laying down the rights of Indonesian migrant workers and regulating the labour migration process make these workers vulnerable to exploitation. According to the ICFTU, unskilled Indonesians wishing to work abroad have to go through recruitment agencies, which charge them extortionate processing and training fees. Migrant workers are thus severely indebted even before they start working abroad. They are legally required to sign contracts with the recruitment agencies and have little power to negotiate their terms. Some contracts are even drafted in a foreign language and applicants are forced to lie about their age, address and even their identity. These workers end up accepting whatever work they are offered, even if it is different from the work envisaged in the contract. They are therefore in a situation of vulnerability to exploitation and forced labour.

According to the ICFTU, prospective migrant workers are exploited before, during and after their period abroad. Agencies require prospective migrant workers to live in training camps for up to 14 months, where they may be forced to work for the recruitment agency staff. Furthermore, conditions in these centres are extremely difficult and certain workers do not always benefit from freedom of movement. The agencies generate substantial profits as the exploitation of migrant workers continues after their departure for host countries. Once they are abroad, migrant workers have to pay off agency fees, which are usually higher than the legal maximum set by the Government. Depending on the country to which they emigrate, the agency is paid a sum corresponding to a number of months salary, which varies according to the country. In these circumstances, it is difficult for the workers, who are mistreated and forced to work longer hours than the normal working day under harsh conditions, to leave because of the contracts they have signed and the money owed to recruitment agencies. These workers encounter difficulties in obtaining information and assistance from their consular authorities, particularly on any redress mechanisms. Finally, migrant workers also have to pay agency fees to renew their contracts, which are usually higher than the legal maximum. Some agencies, by using coercion and deception for the recruitment and transportation of migrant workers abroad, are engaged in the trafficking of persons and should be punished accordingly. In its communication received in August 2004, the ICFTU reiterates these allegations in full.

In reply, the Government indicates that the recruitment of Indonesian migrant workers comes under its responsibility. It is regulated by Decree No. 104A/MEN/2002 and is carried out through public and private recruitment agencies, of which there are currently around 400. Private recruitment agencies have to obtain an official licence, which is only issued after verification of certain criteria. The Government acknowledges that abuses may occur throughout the recruitment process of migrant workers. It therefore supervises the activities of recruitment agencies and sanctions those which do not comply with the regulations. During the period 2002-03, a total of 61 agencies were sanctioned, 53 licences were withdrawn and legal proceedings were initiated against eight agencies. In cooperation with the police, the Ministry of Manpower and Transmigration raided several training and accommodation centres. The Government even suspended the sending of Indonesian workers to the Asian-Pacific area between February and August 2003.

The Government also provides information on the various stages of the recruitment process to which the ICFTU referred in its comments:

-  agencies are under the obligation, under penalty of sanctions, to inform workers of the nature of the job proposed, the conditions of work and constraints relating to the destination country so that they can decide freely whether to agree to leave and sign the employment contract. If the job does not correspond to the one envisaged in the contract, the worker has to refer the matter to the competent government institution so that action can be taken against the agency or employer. Agencies have already been sanctioned in this respect (withdrawal of their licences, the obligation to compensate the worker) and the Government keeps a blacklist of those in violation;

-  the Government establishes the cost of the placement of migrant workers on the basis of various factors, such as supply and demand, particularly with a view to preventing the worker being exploited by the agency. In this respect, the placement agreement concluded between the agency and the worker has to establish the rights and obligations of both parties, and particularly the cost of placement borne by the worker and the payment system. The Government verifies these agreements to prevent excessive costs being borne by workers;

-  the preparation of workers in training centres and the living conditions in dormitories are duly regulated. The Government adds that it has not received any complaint from workers who, having completed their training, are placed in households while awaiting the document authorizing their departure abroad;

-  the obligation to return to Indonesia upon completion of the contract is intended to allow workers to socialize with their families. Such a return is sometimes made compulsory by the host country. This obligation also affords workers the opportunity to extend their working contracts by themselves without going through the agency, thereby avoiding exploitation.

Finally, the Government indicates that it is aware of the lack of bargaining power of migrant workers and for this reason is seeking to improve their conditions through the conclusion of protocol agreements with host countries. Furthermore, a Bill on migrant workers’ placement and protection is under preparation and is intended to: raise the minimum age for working abroad; increase the role of manpower offices in recruitment processes and placement at the regional level; limit the validity of the licences granted to agencies; limit the placement costs borne by workers; and increase sanctions for placement agencies which infringe the law.

The Committee notes all of this information. It observes that the Government is aware of the abuses which may occur during the course of the process of the placement of Indonesian migrant workers and is endeavouring to take measures to combat such abuses and to penalize those responsible for them. Whilst welcoming these government initiatives, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to provide information, particularly on:

-  the nature of the supervision carried out over the activities of placement agencies on the national territory, particularly with regard to the verification of placement agreements and employment contracts and compliance with their terms, the cost of placement actually borne by the worker, the training provided, the living conditions in training centres and dormitories and waiting periods;

-  the means available to the Ministry of Manpower and Transmigration to carry out these controls;

-  the nature of the infringements reported, the penalties imposed and any court decisions with copies of the decisions;

-  the facilities provided (assistance, redress mechanisms, etc.) to Indonesian migrant workers who are exploited in host countries and the protocol agreements signed with these countries, and to provide copies thereof.

Finally, the Committee hopes that the Bill on migrant workers’ placement and protection will be adopted in the very near future. It requests the Government to provide information on the comments made on this subject by the Indonesian Trade Union Congress, which were forwarded to the Government on 15 November 2004.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee notes the Government’s report. It also takes note of the comments of June 2003 by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) on the application of the Convention, a copy of which was sent to the Government on 5 September 2003, and of the Government’s response thereto.

1. Forced labour of children on fishing platforms. In its previous comments the Committee drew the Government’s attention to the situation of children obliged to work in extremely dangerous conditions on fishing platforms (jermal) off the north-east coast of Sumatra. The Government stated that this was largely due to the difficulty experienced by the families of these children in finding other sources of income. It also indicated that the local Government of Sumatra had been instructed to replace all the children with adult workers and that the Governor had set up a team to compile statistics, in particular on the number of children who ought to be attending school and the number of children in need of training for work having reached the minimum age for admission to employment. The Committee also took note of the programme carried out with support from the ILO’s International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC), the main objective of which was to remove 1,900 children from fishing platforms by 2001. It noted that case studies carried out under the IPEC programme referred to instances of forced recruitment and kidnapping the main target of which were the most vulnerable children, such as street children.

In its latest report, the Government states that investigations have brought to light no evidence (such as police reports) of any instances of forced recruitment or kidnapping of children. While noting this information, the Committee observes that the Government has provided no new information on the results obtained from the measures announced in its last report. Nor does it provide information on any other measures taken to put an end the exploitation of child labour on fishing platforms. The Committee notes that the ICFTU, in its comments, emphasizes that although the number of children obliged to work on fishing platforms has been reduced thanks to the action taken by the Government and the ILO, the practice remains.

The Committee notes the adoption of Manpower Act No. 13/74 and notes with interest article 74 of the above Act which prohibits the employment of children in the worst forms of child labour. Article 74 includes in the list of worst forms of child labour, slavery or practices similar to slavery and all kinds of jobs harmful to the health, safety and morals of the child.

The Committee also notes the information supplied by the Government in its first report on the application of the Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138), to the effect that the draft Regulations on the minimum age for admission to employment and the protection of children and young people, will prohibit the employment of children (persons under 18 years of age) in certain branches of activity including fishing on platforms. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the draft Regulations have been adopted and, if so, to provide a copy of them. It furthermore hopes that the Government will provide full information on progress made towards ensuring that children are not forced to work on fishing platforms. It also recalls that children cannot give their valid consent to perform this kind of work, which endangers their health and their safety.

Lastly, the Committee has noted that a letter of agreement was signed on 14 April 2003 between the provincial government of north Sumatra and IPEC/ILO. This agreement constitutes the second phase of the programme to eradicate child labour on the jermals and the aim is to complete the elimination of this form of child labour by 2004.

The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the actions taken to eradicate child labour on jermals and to inform it of the success of the actions in practice.

2. Trafficking in persons. In its comments the ICFTU indicates that trafficking in persons, including for the purpose of forced prostitution, is widespread in Indonesia and that many migrants should be considered as victims of trafficking. According to the ICFTU, some sources suggest that as many as 20 per cent of the 5 million Indonesian migrant workers have fallen victim to this trafficking.

In reply, the Government states that the elimination of trafficking is not an easy task because it relates to cross-border crime. Among other measures to combat trafficking in persons the Government mentions the formulation of bills on trafficking-related crimes. Furthermore, 200 special centres for combating trafficking and 19 integrated services centres have been set up. However, the professional competency of the officers responsible for combating trafficking needs to be further improved. The Government also indicates that since January 2003, the police has taken a number of measures to combat trafficking: development of cooperation with the ministries concerned; operations in prostitution areas; development of cooperation in combating child prostitution and return of the victims to their places of origin; settlement of numerous cases of trafficking. The Government expresses the hope that in view of the above information, the ICFTU will treat the issue of Indonesian migrant workers in a balanced manner by providing information on improper practices that may occur in the receiving countries.

The Committee takes due note of the measures already taken by the Government to combat trafficking in persons. It further notes that a National Action Plan was adopted on 30 December 2002 to abolish trafficking in women and children (Presidential Instruction No. 88/2002). The objectives of the abovementioned plan are:

-  legal norms and actions against traffickers of women and children;

-  legally guaranteed rehabilitation and reintegration of the victims of trafficking;

-  prevention of all forms of woman and child trafficking in the family and society;

-  cooperation and coordination in the abolition of woman and child trafficking between institutions at the national and international levels.

The Committee also notes that the approval of laws on the abolition of woman and child trafficking, witness and victim protection, and migrant worker protection constitute one of the many targets of the plan. It requests the Government to provide information on the adoption of the draft legislation on crimes and trafficking to which the Government referred in its report, and on any other texts that may have been adopted to meet the objectives of the National Action Plan for abolishing woman and child trafficking. The Committee would also be grateful if the Government would provide information on any other measures taken under the plan, on the results obtained in combating the trafficking in persons in general, and not only the trafficking in women and children (the sole target of the National Action Plan), and on any prosecutions brought for trafficking in persons for the purposes of labour exploitation with a view to punishing the offenders. The Committee recalls in this connection that, according to Article 25 of the Convention, the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour shall be punishable as a penal offence, and any Member ratifying the Convention is required to ensure that the penalties imposed by law are really adequate and are strictly enforced.

3. The Committee notes that, in its comments received in August 2003 and forwarded to the Government on 26 September 2003, the ICFTU indicates that the requirement for migrants to go through recruitment agencies and the absence of legislation laying down rights and regulating the labour migration process make these workers vulnerable to exploitation. According to the ICFTU, Indonesians wishing to work abroad have to go through recruitment agencies, which charge them extortionate processing and training fees. Migrant workers are thus severely indebted even before they start working abroad. They are required to sign contracts with the recruitment agencies and have little or no power to negotiate their terms. Some contracts are even drafted in a foreign language. Many migrants end up accepting whatever work they are offered, even if it is different from the work they were promised. The ICFTU is of the view that these conditions make Indonesian migrant workers vulnerable to exploitation and forced labour.

The ICFTU considers that prospective migrant workers are exploited before, during and after the period abroad. Agencies require prospective migrant workers to live in training camps for up to 14 months where they may be forced to work for the agency staff. Furthermore, conditions in these centres are poor. Once abroad, they must pay off agency fees, which are usually higher than the maximum set by the Government. Agencies charge fees equivalent to a number of months’ salary, which varies according to the country of destination. In such circumstances, even if they are mistreated and forced to work long hours under harsh conditions, Indonesian migrants cannot leave because of the contracts they have signed and the money owed to agencies. They must also pay agency fees in order to renew their employment contract which are higher than the legal maximum. According to the ICFTU, agencies that use coercion and deception in recruiting and transporting migrants for work abroad where they can exploit them fall under the definition of traffickers and should be punished accordingly.

The Committee requests the Government to provide full information in response to the ICFTU’s comments on the exploitation of migrant workers.

4. The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government on the working conditions of persons employed in industrial forest plantations established under the logging concessions to develop forestry.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee notes the Government’s report.

1.  The Committee had asked the Government to supply information on the situation of children obliged to work under extremely dangerous conditions on fishing platforms off the north-east coast of Sumatra. It notes from the information communicated by the Government in its report of February 1999, that the Government is aware that this situation is not compatible with the Convention, but that it is due to the difficulty experienced by the families of these children to find other sources of income. The Government states that the local government of the north of Sumatra has been called on to create alternative sources of income for the population living along the coasts of this region and that the Government, in collaboration with the ILO’s International Programme for the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC), is currently undertaking a study with a view to solving the problem of the children working on fishing platforms (jermals). The Government also indicates that the local government has received instructions to replace all the children by adult workers, and that the Governor has established a team in charge of gathering statistics on the number of children who should be receiving schooling; the number in need of training for work having reached the age of employment; and the number of children who could become self-employed.

2.  The Committee notes that one of the IPEC programme objectives in the field of eradication of child labour in the fisheries sector in Indonesia, of which the Committee has been informed, is to remove 1,900 children from the fishing platforms before 2001. However, the Committee notes the information presented in the case studies carried out under the IPEC programme, which suggest that there have been cases of forced recruitment and kidnapping, which have targeted the most vulnerable children, such as street children. The Committee notes that the Government is involved in this programme. The Committee also notes the statement made by Anti-Slavery International at the 25th Session of the United Nations Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery held from 14 to 23 June 2000, that children are still working on the platforms. It appears from the interviews carried out during the study that organizations conducted, that children are removed from the platforms when the inspection visits are announced. According to this information, some children are obliged to remain on the platforms without being paid for their labour, after working 12 hours a day over several months.

3.  The Committee hopes that the Government will supply information on the measures taken to ensure that its instructions are strictly applied as regards the recruitment of children for work on fishing platforms, so as to avoid them being subject to conditions of forced labour and exploitation, particularly as regards the payment of wages and working hours, to which neither the children themselves could freely agree, nor their parents in their place.

4.  In its previous observation, the Committee referred to the situation in East Kalimantan on the Island of Borneo, where, according to allegations formulated by the World Confederation of Labour (WCL), the Dayak tribe were submitted to conditions of debt bondage. This situation arose from practices in commercial logging concessions under community development programmes drawn up by the enterprises and in industrial forest plantations. By way of compensation for the negative impact of these concessions on local communities, the Government is said to have required all concessions to undertake the development of a nearby community under the HPH Bina Desa Programme; however, according to the WCL, these programmes were commonly misused by companies, which coerced and threatened villagers into forming work groups and farmers’ groups. The groups were then ordered to carry out uncompensated labour on participatory development projects designed by the company without regard for the needs or wishes of the community being "developed".

5.  The Committee also noted that, according to the WCL, under the industrial forest transmigration programme, impoverished farmers from Java were provided with a boat ticket to a Kalimantan port. They were then placed in far-flung locations, where some had no choice but to engage in plantation labour for a wage lower than the cost of living, forcing them into debt. Indigenous people, as well as transmigrant workers, were forced into a situation of total dependence and impoverished workers were turned into bonded labourers.

6.  The Government indicated in its September 1998 report that the objective of the community development programme was to assist the village community in acquiring economic and social facilities such as roads and village meeting halls, developing various local businesses, and improving awareness of forest conservation and security. Planning and implementation by the logging concessions is always based on a diagnostic study, which is to identify the economic condition and potential of the respective village as well as social conditions, aspirations and expectations of the community. To build the economic and social facilities, the Dayak people ask only for support from the programme to provide the material needed. They work together voluntarily without expecting wages. The Committee had asked the Government to provide information on the practical application of the programmes, and particularly on any measures aiming, for example, at guaranteeing that the villagers concerned enter into the programmes voluntarily and that there is no form of compulsory labour.

7.  The Committee notes the information communicated by the Government in its February 1999 report, to the effect that the industrial forest plantation transmigration (IFP), is carried out through voluntary recruitment, with families receiving adequate lodgings. The worker is paid a wage that must not be lower than the regional minimum wage, and the working week is around 40 hours. The Government also indicates that four of the indigenous community leaders met between 21 and 24 July 1998, and agreed that the migration implantation programmes were well accepted and should not be called into question. The Government also made efforts to meet the leaders of the indigenous communities and social workers from the villages engaged in the community development programmes. These meetings have shown that the communities appreciate the presence of the IFPs and their support to the development of the economic and social infrastructure of the community, and the populations of the villages are aware that they are participating in collective work, for which they have given their own consent, willingly.

8.  The Committee takes due note of these indications. It requests the Government to continue to supply information on the situation of indigenous communities engaged in IFPs, in particular on the measures taken to ensure the principle of voluntary recruitment in practice. The Committee asks the Government to indicate whether the indigenous worker engaged in the IFP signs a contract of employment, and to transmit a copy of such contract. The Committee also wishes to receive information on the amount of the wages effectively earned by IFP participants.

9.  In its earlier comments, the Committee also mentioned a joint decree by the Ministries of Forestry and Transmigration, requiring the logging concessions to develop industrial forest plantations known as Huraman Tanaman Industry (HTI). The Committee had been informed that the wages paid in the plantations were usually significantly lower than the cost of living, that shops had opened near the plantations or logging worksites, and that purchases at these stores were made by a system of vouchers managed by the company. This system was established on the basis of wages to be earned by the workers, thus creating the risk of debt bondage. The Committee noted that the report contained no comment on this point with regard to debt bondage, and asked the Government to provide information on this matter. The last report was also without information on this question, and the Committee hopes that the Government will supply the detailed information requested in the near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee notes the Government's report.

Article 1(1) and Article 2, of the Convention. 1. In its previous observation, the Committee asked the Government to provide information on the situation in East Kalimantan on the Island of Borneo. The Committee referred in considerable detail to information from the World Confederation of Labour (WCL) that the Dayak people were submitted to conditions of debt bondage. This resulted from practices in commercial logging concessions, in related company-designed community development projects, and in industrial forest plantations. Also, as a result of the negative impact of logging concessions on local communities, the Government was said to have required all concessions to undertake the development of a nearby community under a development programme (HPH Bina Desa Programme); but these programmes were commonly misused by companies which coerced and threatened villagers into forming work groups and farmers' groups. The groups were then, it was said, ordered to carry out uncompensated labour on so-called "participatory" development projects designed by the company without regard for the needs or wishes of the community being "developed".

2. The Government states in its report that the objective of the community development programme is to assist the village community in acquiring economic and social facilities such as road construction and village meeting halls, developing various local businesses, and improving awareness of forest conservation and security. Planning and implementation by the logging concessions is always based on a diagnostic study, which is to identify the economic condition and potential of the respective village as well as social conditions, aspirations and expectations of the community. To build the economic and social facilities, the Dayak people are usually only asking for support from the programme to provide the material needed. They work together voluntarily without expecting wages.

3. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the practical application of the programmes, and particularly on any measures aiming, for example, at guaranteeing that the programmes are entered into voluntarily by the villagers concerned and that there is no form of compulsory work or any constraint in the application of the programmes by the companies, whose interest it is to show that the programmes have been completed to secure the renewal of their timber licenses. It remains concerned at allegations of forced labour in these circumstances.

4. The Committee in its previous observations also mentioned a joint decree by the Ministries of Forestry and Transmigration, requiring the logging concessions to develop industrial forest plantations (Hutaman Tanaman Industri, HTI). The Committee indicated that it had been informed that wages paid on the plantation were usually significantly lower than the cost of living. Company stores had been established near plantation or logging work sites. Purchases at these company stores were made under a voucher system run by company management and the vouchers were based upon future wages, thus creating a risk of debt-incurred labour. The Committee notes that there are no comments on that aspect in the report with regard to debt bondage and asks the Government to provide information on this matter in its next report.

5. The Committee previously noted that, according to the WCL, under the industrial forest plantation transmigration programme, impoverished farmers from Java are provided with a boat ticket to a Kalimantan port. They are then placed in far-off locations, and there is no choice for some of them but to engage in plantation labour or logging work gangs at wages lower than the cost of living, forcing them into debt. Indigenous people, as well as transmigrant workers, are forced into a situation of total dependence and impoverished workers are turned into bonded labourers.

6. The Government in response states that the transmigration programme is for transferring people from the densely populated areas (Java and Bali) to the less inhabited areas (in general on other islands), and opening new agricultural land. Industrial forest plantation may be managed by the Government, or by private enterprises or cooperatives, with 35-year concessions. Transmigrants are recruited on a voluntary basis. The available land is Government-owned unproductive land which has not yet been occupied, possessed or governed by any traditional local people. Wages may not be lower than the regional minimum wage.

7. The Committee refers to Recommendation No. 35 concerning indirect compulsion to labour and recalls the principles it lays down to guide the policy in endeavouring to avoid any indirect compulsion to labour. In deciding questions connected with the economic development of territories, particularly when deciding upon increases in the numbers and extent of agricultural undertakings, non-indigenous settlements or the granting of forest or other concessions, several factors should be taken into consideration. The factors include matters such as the amount of labour available, the capacities of the population and the evil effects which sudden changes in the habits of life and labour may have on the social conditions of the population. It is also desirable to avoid indirect means of artificially increasing the economic pressure upon populations to seek wage-earning employment, particularly by such means as imposing such restrictions on the possession, occupation, or use of land as would have the effect of rendering difficult the gaining of a living by independent cultivation.

8. While noting the information provided by the Government in its report, the Committee would ask the Government to provide information on any measures taken in the forestry sector to ensure that no conditions are created which would forcibly lead workers into a situation of bondage, total dependence or abusive exploitation: such measures might include, for example, inspections, investigation or supervision, particularly as regards wages actually paid, the operation of company stores, the system of vouchers in use therein and other aspects of the conditions of work of indigenous people and transmigrants. The Committee asks the Government to provide any relevant reports on labour inspection in the field of interregional employment. It also asks the Government to provide information on the sanctions applicable in cases of abuse (Article 25 of the Convention).

9. Finally, the Committee again asks the Government to provide information on the situation of workers in dangerous conditions on fishing platforms off the coast of Sumatra, where there is said to be forced child labour. As no information was included in the report, the Committee asks the Government to provide this information with its next report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

The Committee notes that the Government's reports received in December 1996 and September 1997 contain no reply to its previous comments. It hopes that the next report will include full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

In previous comments the Committee noted various ministerial regulations providing guidelines for the inter-regions employment (AKAD). It noted that under the Ministerial Decision No. 12/MEN/BP/84, which provides for various protective measures for contract labourers in Sumatra, AKAD workers should be free to decide upon expiration of their contracts to stay on or to return to their places of origin. However, under the guidelines, labourers are to be persuaded to stay in the regions rather than to go back to their places of origin.

The Committee noted the Government's indication in its report that the right of workers to return to their places of origin is protected by the Ministerial Regulation No. 02/MEN/1994 on national and overseas employment placement. It noted that, under section 12, the employer/user is obliged to provide protection of workers during the periods of pre- and post-placement, to submit periodical reports to the Department of Manpower on details about the interregional movements of workers and that, under section 41, the violations of the provisions of the Regulation are punishable with imprisonment or fine.

The Committee, having noted the Government's indication in its report that labour inspectors have the authority to conduct inspection during the period of the labour contract, requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to protect workers during the periods which fall outside the duration of the labour contract.

The Committee would appreciate receiving information more generally on the achievements of labour inspectors in the field of inter-regions employment, information on measures taken by the labour inspectorate to supervise labour contractors, including statistical data on numbers of AKAD workers who decided to stay on in the region after the initial period of the inter-regions employment and those who chose to go back to their places of origin, number of cases of punishment under article 41 of the 1994 Regulation and other relevant facts which would assist the Committee to satisfy itself that the Convention is fully applied.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

The Committee notes the observations on the application of the Convention made in October 1997 by the World Confederation of Labour, including a 1997 report by Anti-Slavery International entitled "Enslaved Peoples in the 1990s", which contains in Chapter Three information on debt bondage and on forced labour on "village development" projects of indigenous Dayak villagers in East Kalimantan (Borneo). The Committee also notes that these observations were transmitted to the Government, in November 1997, for any comments it might judge to be appropriate.

The Committee notes the allegations of the trade union that many indigenous and migrant forest communities in Indonesia are being subjected to debt bondage and forced labour as a result of the devastation of the country's forest resources brought about by private sector logging operations and "development" policies espoused by the Indonesian Government and by one of its largest funders, the World Bank.

The trade union's allegations focus on recent events in East Kalimantan, on the island of Borneo, in order to provide a clear understanding of the way in which modern forms of enclosure, dispossession, and pauperism are being carried out in the name of "development".

According to the allegations, a number of indigenous groups, known as Dayaks, have traditionally inhabited the forested regions of Kalimantan. After the Second World War when Indonesia gained independence from the Dutch colonial government, increasing numbers of Indonesian (primarily Javanese) police, military officers, school teachers, and other government officials, moved into the interior regions of Kalimantan. Beginning in the 1970s, entire settlements of logging and mining camp workers, as well as government-sponsored Javanese transmigrants, moved into indigenous lands. Faced with threats made by company personnel backed up by armed forces, tribal peoples had little choice but to resettle themselves on remaining portions of their ancestral lands and hunting grounds.

The allegations indicate that, in the mid-to-late 1980s and early 1990s, deforestation and human rights abuses in East Kalimantan escalated sharply. Not only did commercial logging reach unprecedented heights, but government policies ostensibly aimed at bettering the lot of forest communities and ensuring forest conservation, resulting in increasing destruction and dispossession. According to the trade union's allegations, what can be considered modern forms of slavery were observable throughout the region.

In 1990, as a result of the negative impact of logging concessions on local communities, the Indonesian Government required all concessions to undertake the development of a nearby community under what was known as the HPH Bina Desa programme. If a logging concession was not able to implement a village development project successfully, its licence could be revoked by the Government. However, according to the allegations, what commonly happened was that companies coerced and threatened villagers into forming work groups or farmers' groups. The groups were then ordered to carry out uncompensated labour on what was euphemistically called a "participatory" development project, designed by the logging company without regard for the needs or wishes of the community being "developed". Most of these Bina Desa projects were complete failures, and led to additional environmental destruction and social conflict. Nevertheless, as far as the companies were concerned, they served their purpose, allowing them to secure the renewal of their timber licences.

The allegations state that, in addition, the Ministries of Forestry and Transmigration produced a law by joint decree, requiring all logging concessions to develop Industrial Forest Plantations, known as Hutan Tanaman Industri (or HTI). As set forth in the trade union allegations, an HTI is set up by means of land clearing rather than logging.

The allegations state that, with the destruction of their lands and livelihood, the affected indigenous Dayak peoples are forced to seek employment as temporary workers without contracts on the very Industrial Forest Plantations (HTIs) which have destroyed their ancestral lands. Plantation wages are usually significantly lower than the cost of living. With the destruction of their agroforestry systems and rice fields, indigenous Dayaks are also forced to purchase food instead of growing it. Many HTIs and logging concessions have taken advantage of this fact and have established "company stores" near their base camps. Purchases may be made at the company stores under a voucher system run by company management. Under this system workers are given credit which is based upon the future wages of the Dayak labourers, who often find themselves not only dispossessed from their lands but trapped deeply in debt to the very companies which appropriated their lands and forests.

The allegations indicate that, after the World Bank withdrew funding for Indonesia's transmigration programme as a result of a massive international outcry over the environmental destruction and human rights abuses occurring under it, the Indonesian Ministry of Transmigration requested that the forestry sector fund its programmes. As a result, as part of HTI development, transmigrants (usually impoverished farmers from Java) are shipped out to the wastelands which have been created on deforested and bulldozed indigenous territories and assigned to plantation labour.

The allegations state that, due to the inability of "land cleared" regions to support agricultural and silvicultural activities, as well as the unsuitability of the farming techniques practised by transmigrants for the poor soils of Kalimantan, there is a high rate of failure in these transmigration schemes. In this respect it is not just the indigenous Dayak communities who are affected. Industrial forest plantation transmigration programmes leave the transmigrant labourers themselves trapped and desperate. Under the transmigration programme, impoverished farmers are provided with a boat ticket from Java to a Kalimantan port. They are then taken miles deep into indigenous territories, where often there are no roads other than rough logging roads. After the failure of their food crops, it is very difficult for the transmigrants to leave the regions where they have been placed. Often there is no choice but to engage in plantation labour at wages lower than the cost of living. In addition to plantation labour, transmigrant men often form work gangs under a contractor who sells their labour to the logging concessions. These logging gangs go into the forest for months at a time scouting for timber. Work gangs also comb the forest for valuable products such as rattan, swifts' nests or fragrant gaharu wood. According to the information submitted by the WCL, "the inflated prices of the goods combined with the under-valuing of the forest products brought back by the labour gangs ensure that labourers remain trapped in a cycle of debt and must continually return to the forest in order to collect valuable products so that they are able to pay off the debts they incur on every trip".

According to the allegations, the problem can be illustrated by observing the activities at the PT.K logging concession in East Kalimantan between 1990 and 1994. The logging company PT.K is a branch of one of Indonesia's largest and most well-known forestry conglomerates, considered to be a leader in the industry. The operations of this company, typical of the operations of Indonesian logging concessions throughout the country, have resulted in the destruction of the natural resource base and wider human rights abuses, including the use of forced labour.

The allegations state that, "in order to obtain a renewal of their logging licence, the PT.K company was obliged by law to implement a village development project near its concessions area under the HPH Bina Desa Programme. Local villagers were ordered to form cooperative work groups or farmers' groups to work on development projects designed by the company. When farmers refused, village leaders were bribed and then coerced into helping the company and local police to force villagers to form a work group".

The allegations describe, as another example, a company store set up on a PT.G rubber plantation which had been established on cleared rattan gardens. The company store was set up where labourers could only purchase goods at exorbitant prices using a voucher system. Indigenous workers, having lost their lands and therefore their ability to grow their own food, now use vouchers representing future wages in order to make purchases at the company store. When they make purchases, they are not informed as to the amount of their total debt. The increasing debts are then subtracted from their future wages, turning once independent and relatively well-off farmers into impoverished bonded labourers trapped in an ever-mounting cycle of debt.

The allegations further indicate that the extent to which indigenous peoples as well as transmigrants are vulnerable to debt bondage and forced labour is not widely publicized.

According to the "Indonesia Report on Human Rights Practices for 1996", published by the US Department of State, human rights monitors have expressed concern about the practices of some logging companies that recruit indigenous people for work. The report indicates that, according to Human Rights Watch/Asia, this activity in Irian Jaya has separated these people from their traditional economies. In many cases, these new recruits for development projects are ill-prepared for the modern world, leading to their being forced into debt and then indentured.

The Committee hopes the Government will provide full information on these allegations.

According to the US Department of State report referred to above, there are credible reports of teenage children being forced to work under highly dangerous conditions on fishing platforms off the coast of north-eastern Sumatra. These platforms are miles off shore, with access controlled by the employers, and in many cases the children are virtual prisoners on the platforms and forced to work for up to three months at a time for well below the minimum wage. The report states that, according to knowledgeable sources, hundreds of children may be involved.

The Committee asks the Government to supply complete information in regard to this question.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 83rd ILC session (1996)

The Committee notes the Government's report.

In previous comments the Committee noted various ministerial regulations providing guidelines for the inter-regions employment (AKAD). It noted that under the Ministerial Decision No. 12/MEN/BP/84, which provides for various protective measures for contract labourers in Sumatra, AKAD workers should be free to decide upon expiration of their contracts to stay on or to return to their places of origin. However, under the guidelines, labourers are to be persuaded to stay in the regions rather than to go back to their places of origin.

The Committee notes the Government's indication in its report that the right of workers to return to their places of origin is protected by the Ministerial Regulation No. 02/MEN/1994 on national and overseas employment placement. It notes that, under section 12, the employer/user is obliged to provide protection of workers during the periods of pre- and post-placement, to submit periodical reports to the Department of Manpower on details about the interregional movements of workers and that, under section 41, the violations of the provisions of the Regulation is punishable with imprisonment or fine.

The Committee, noting the Government's indication in its report that labour inspectors have the authority to conduct inspection during the period of the labour contract, requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to protect workers during the periods which fall outside the duration of the labour contract.

The Committee would appreciate receiving information more generally on the achievements of labour inspectors in the field of inter-regions employment, information on measures taken by the labour inspectorate to supervise labour contractors, including statistical data on numbers of AKAD workers who decided to stay on in the region after the initial period of the inter-regions employment and those who chose to go back to their places of origin, number of cases of punishment under article 41 of the 1994 Regulation and other relevant facts which would assist the Committee to satisfy itself that the Convention is fully applied.

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

The Committee notes the Government's report.

In previous comments the Committee, referring to the question of free choice of work for contract labourers, after expiration of their contracts, had noted Ministerial Decision No. 12/MEN/BP/84 of 24 January 1984 which provides for various protective measures for contract labourers in Sumatra, such as the obligation of suppliers of plantation labour to bear all costs for returning workers to their homes. The Committee also noted various ministerial regulations providing guidelines for the interregions employment (AKAD). The Committee noted that under the Ministerial Decision, AKAD workers should be free to decide upon expiration of their contracts to stay on or to return to their places of origin. However, under the guidelines, labourers are to be persuaded to stay in the regions rather than to go back to their places of origin.

The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of the guidelines as concerns freedom of workers to return to their places of origin, and, in particular, on the application of the provisions of Ministerial Decision of 1984 concerning transportation costs.

The Committee also requests the Government to supply information more generally on measures taken to supervise the activities of labour contractors, to investigate allegations of forced labour and to ensure that all illegal exaction of work is strictly punished. The Committee would appreciate if the Government would provide information on the activities of the labour inspectorate in this regard.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

The Committee notes the Government's report.

1. Article 25 of the Convention.

(a) In its previous comments concerning the free choice of work for contract labourers after expiration of their contracts, the Committee referred to Ministerial Decision No. 12/MEN/BP/84 of 24 January 1984 which provides for various protective measures for contract labourers in Sumatra, such as the obligation of the suppliers of plantation labour to bear all the transportation costs for returning workers to their homes. The Committee notes the Government's statement in its report that workers who want to return to their places of origin should be paid their returning transportation costs. The Committee hopes that the Government will provide in its next report information on any problems encountered in the application of this provision and, if so, on the action taken. The Committee requests the Government to provide a copy of the PIR special plantation project to which the Government refers in its report as well as of the provisions governing local transmigration.

(b) The Committee had also noted Ministerial Regulation No. KEP-883/MEN/1987 concerning Operational Guide-lines for Inter-Regions Employment and the Regulation of the Director-General for Manpower Development and Placement No. KEP-2130/MEN/BP/1987 concerning Technical Guidance for Implementation of Inter-Regions Employment. The Committee notes the Government's information in its report that these texts have been substituted by Regulation No. KEP-1144/MEN/1988 and Regulation No. KEP-669/MEN/BP/1989. The Committee requests the Government to provide with its next report a copy of each regulation.

(c) The Committee also requested previously the Government to supply information, more generally, on the measures taken to supervise the activities of labour contractors, to investigate allegations of forced labour and to ensure that all illegal exaction of work is strictly punished, as well as information on the activities of the labour inspectorate in this regard. The Committee notes the Government's information in its report that labour inspection provides for the enforcement of the labour agreements. The Committee would appreciate more detailed information on the enforcement machinery, in particular, over inspections carried out, on cases of prosecutions, as well as a copy of inspection reports dealing with the question of free choice of labour by contract labourers.

2. The Committee had noted that under article 19, paragraph 1(d), of the Government Regulation No. 52 of 1958 on the Service Contract and Legal Status of Career Members of the Armed Forces, a career member can resign on request if the request is accepted; under article 22, paragraph 1, those who apply for resignation under article 19, paragraph 1(d) and (f), are obliged to reimburse the cost of all or a part of the education they have obtained during their services. Under paragraph 2 of the same article, the amount of the reimbursement could be raised by a decision of the Minister of Defence. The Committee notes the Government's information in its report that Regulation No. 52 of 1958 has been replaced by Regulation No. 6 of 1990 and is no longer valid; it also notes the Government's indication that article 19(1)(d), (f) and (2) has never been implemented. The Committee requests the Government to provide with its next report a copy of Regulation No. 6 of 1990.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

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:

1. Article 25 of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the discussions at the Conference Committee since 1979 concerning the free choice of work for contract labourers after expiration of their contracts. It noted information on Ministerial Decision No. 12/MEN/BP/84 of 24 January 1984 which provided for various protective measures for contract labourers in Sumatra, such as the obligation of the suppliers of plantation labour to bear all the transportation costs for returning workers to their homes, and it requested the Government to continue supplying information on the practical application of this Decision.

The Committee noted Ministerial Regulation No. KEP-883/MEN/1987 concerning Operational Guide-lines for Inter-Regions Employment and Regulation of the Director-General for Manpower Development and Placement No. KEP-2130/MEN/BP/1987 concerning Technical Guidance for Implementation of Inter-Regions Employment, copies of which have been supplied by the Government in its report. The Committee noted the indication in the Systematic Guide-lines for the Inter-Regions Employment annexed to the Ministerial Regulation, particularly in its Introduction, I,A, that the inter-regions employment (AKAD), until now, has not evolved as it had been anticipated and that simplification of the procedure is needed for the purpose of encouraging the scheme. The Committee also noted from Part IV on the procedure of labourers' repatriation that the labourers are to be persuaded to stay in the regions rather than going back to their places of origin. The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the practical application of these Guide-lines, particularly in the light of the principle that AKAD workers should be free to decide upon expiration of their contracts whether to stay on or to go back to their original places, the principle which is provided for in the Ministerial Decision of 1984 referred to above.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information, more generally, on the measures taken to supervise the activities of labour contractors, to investigate allegations of forced labour and to ensure that all illegal exaction of work is strictly punished. It would appreciate information on the activities of the labour inspectorate in this regard.

2. The Committee noted Government Regulation No. 52 of 1958 on the Service Contract and Legal Status of Career Members of the Armed Forces, a copy of which was supplied with the Government's report received in 1988. The Committee noted that under article 19, paragraph 1(d), of the Regulation, a career member can resign from the service when he applies for it and when he obtains it. The Committee further noted that under article 22, paragraph 1, those who apply for resignation under article 19, paragraph 1(d) and (f), are obliged to reimburse the cost of whole or a part of the education they have obtained during their services. Under paragraph 2 of the same article, the amount of the reimbursement can be raised by a decision of the Minister of Defence. The Committee requests the Government to supply in its next report information on the practical application of articles 19 and 22, in particular on criteria applied in accepting the resignation. The Committee would also appreciate information on the length of a special service contract provided for under article 18 which applies to career members who obtain free education in or outside the country.