Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2013, Publication: 102nd ILC session (2013)



A Government representative emphasized that the Republic of Chad fully supported the Convention, which had led to the creation of tripartite bodies, as was the case of the Higher Committee for Labour and Social Security, which dealt with all matters relating to action for the application of labour standards. Reference should also be made to the National Social Dialogue Committee, which had contributed to resolving the social crisis that the country had experienced. Tripartite consultation was therefore not ignored, and the Government hoped that the Committee would take that into account.

The Worker members emphasized that, since 2000, the Committee of Experts had regularly asked the Government to provide the necessary information to enable it to fully assess the effect given to the Convention. In 2013, the Committee of Experts had again noted with regret that the Government had still not met its obligations under the Convention and, in the absence of a report, had had to reiterate its 2006 observation, which referred to a national plan for the implementation of the African Union Plan of Action for the promotion of employment and poverty alleviation. One of the objectives of the national plan was to promote social dialogue and tripartism by giving social dialogue institutions the means to operate and by strengthening the capacities of the social partners through training and information. In October 2009, a very brief report had been provided, merely stating that information on each of the matters covered by Article 5(1) of the Convention was not available. The Government had just submitted a two-page report during the current session of the Conference, providing little more information than the previous one, which dated from 2009. It appeared from the report that there was some confusion regarding the scope of certain provisions of the Convention, in particular Articles 4 and Article 5(1)(a) to (e). The consultations provided for in Article 5 were also intended to help governments when taking decisions on specific issues. What was important was for all the views to be heard, but without the Convention imposing an obligation to reach consensus, however desirable that might be. The Convention was therefore fairly flexible, leaving it to each country to determine the most appropriate form of consultation from among the many options available: advisory committees, economic and social councils, labour councils or tripartite commissions directly inspired by the Convention. The 2006, 2009 and 2013 reports mentioned the existence of a Higher Committee for Labour, Employment and Social Security, which was described as being responsible for the tripartite consultations required under the Convention. The Convention, however, did not require consultations on economic and social policy issues, so the question arose as to why efforts had not been pursued to put appropriate mechanisms in place for tripartite consultations on ILO Conventions. For several years, the Committee of Experts had been referring to the 2008 Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalization, which considered social dialogue and the practice of tripartism within and across borders to be more relevant than ever to achieving solutions and to building up social cohesion and the rule of law through, among other means, international labour standards. In the same way as the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81), Convention No. 144 was a so-called “governance” Convention, the aim of which was to promote tripartism and social dialogue at the national level by ensuring that employers’ and workers’ organizations were involved in all stages of ILO standard-setting activities. It was difficult to understand the Government’s continued failure to follow up the comments made by the Committee of Experts as anything other than a lack of understanding of the Convention. In conclusion, the Worker members said that that should be reflected in the conclusions on the case, which should identify means of assisting the Government in that regard.

The Employer members noted that, although the Committee of Experts had continued to request reports on the application of the Convention, there had been no response from the Government. They recalled that Chad was classified as a low-income country. From what the workers said, it was not clear whether social dialogue existed in the country and was not reported, or whether it did not exist. There was also clearly a lack of understanding of the reporting system. With regard to social dialogue, it should be recalled that the 2008 ILO Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalization indicated that “social dialogue and the practice of tripartism between governments and the representative organizations of workers and employers within and across borders are now more relevant to achieving solutions and to building up social cohesion and the rule of law through, among other means, international labour standards”. Emphasis should also be placed on the importance of the reporting requirements. It was to be hoped that the reports supplied would enable the Committee to note tangible efforts to strengthen social dialogue with the representatives of employers and workers.

The Worker member of Chad recalled that social dialogue and tripartism were the form of governance that was most conducive to social justice and to equitable and harmonious labour relations, presupposing as they did the right to participate in decision-making. Collective bargaining was therefore at the very heart of social dialogue. However, even though social dialogue did exist in Chad, it did not function according to the principles defined by the ILO, as it did not encompass all the forms of negotiation, consultation and exchange of information on the country’s economic and social policies between the three parties. At best, social dialogue in Chad was sporadic and incapable of getting to the root of problems. Workers’ organizations, and the Trade Union Federation of Chad (UST) in particular, had always called for permanent dialogue to forestall collective and individual disputes before they became too difficult to solve. Harsh reality had shown that there was no such dialogue in practice, as was seen in the 2012 strike that was called to demand the implementation of an agreement signed by the trade unions and the Government. The authorities’ failure to react with regard to the one-month period of notice had led to its extension and to a succession of three-day strikes pending negotiations. The strike had lasted for two months, during which mock negotiations interspersed with threats and anti-union attacks had been the order of the day. As positions had hardened on both sides, the movement had spread, and had paralysed the entire public administration for six months, when dialogue could have avoided both the economic costs and the loss of lives. The Government’s refusal to make any concessions had resulted in the adoption, at a general assembly held on 1 September 2012, of a petition denouncing the poor governance of the country’s resources, which the Government had described as a political act that went beyond the competence of a trade union. The UST’s Secretary-General had been the victim of harassment by the political and judicial authorities, and the religious authorities were granted a one-month truce and made an offer of mediation to overcome the crisis, which had unfortunately failed. In September 2012, the federation’s three senior officers only just avoided being kidnapped, and their lawyers had had to pressure the Public Prosecutor to follow the proper procedure and order the judicial police to take appropriate action and decide to bring criminal charges to those responsible for defamation and incitement to racial hatred. The courts had handed down an 18-month suspended sentence and fined each person 1 million CFA francs after a trial that had merely lasted half an hour. An activist who had been present in the courtroom and who had smiled at the harshness of the sentence had been charged with contempt of court and sentenced to three months in prison and a heavy fine. He had subsequently died in October 2012, while still in prison, as a result of a degenerative disease, the cause of which was as yet unknown. Eventually, an ad hoc negotiating committee set up by a decree issued by the Prime Minister had managed to restore social peace through an agreement signed in March 2013. On 4 June, after a series of postponed hearings, the judicial authorities had finally annulled the initial ruling handed down by the court of first instance He considered that it was important to indicate that, even though the institutions and structures for dialogue existed, they did not always function and the representativeness criteria were not respected. Blackleg unions created for the occasion received favourable treatment, in violation of the Labour Code and in the absence of trade union elections. Thus, the Basic Act establishing the Economic, Social and Cultural Council gave preference to occupational unions rather than union federations, as a result of which the UST, which represented over 80 per cent of all trade unionists, refused to participate. As the lack of prior consultation on the follow-up to certain Conventions and Recommendations and on the items on the Conference agenda showed, there was no proper social dialogue. The Government should therefore be asked to resolve the flagrant violation of ILO Conventions and to create a climate that was conducive to frank social dialogue with a view to achieving social and economic progress.

The Worker member of France emphasized that Chad was the fourth least-developed country in the world, with a human development index of 0.340. Effective tripartite social dialogue was essential for the pursuit of the objectives of social justice, the fight against inequality and respect for fundamental principles and rights at work. It required a climate of freedom of expression in a democratic framework which did not exist in practice in Chad. Journalists were intimidated and harassed by the Government, which was prejudicial to their independence. Trade unionists were also exposed to harassment and many were penalized for taking part in strikes. Fearing for their safety, human rights defenders and members of the political opposition had been driven into exile. The “Workers’ tribunal” radio programme presented by a trade unionist to inform workers of their labour rights and obligations had been discontinued. Today the Government was referring to the Higher Committee for Labour and Social Security, set up in 2002, but it had never replied to the repeated requests of the Committee to supply information on the agreements reached in the Higher Committee. Moreover, even though the functions of that body included the application of the laws and regulations in force, the regulations adopted by the President following a strike for the purpose of substantially adjusting wage and minimum wage levels up to 2014, in line with an agreement with the Union of Trade Unions of Chad (UST) and the Free Confederation of Workers of Chad (CLTT), had never been adopted by the ministries concerned. That confirmed that freedom of expression was non-existent and that the process of conducting balanced tripartite social dialogue was being undermined for lack of political will.

The Worker member of New Zealand, noting the weakness of tripartite consultation in the country, drew attention to more recent breaches of ILO Conventions since the preparation of the report by the Committee of Experts. In December 2013, following a strike in the public sector, three trade union leaders, including Michel Barka, the head of the UST, had been given 18 month suspended jail sentences for “defamation” and “incitement to hatred”. The strike had been called following the unilateral repudiation by the Government of a national minimum wage award. The charges against the union leaders had been condemned by human rights and international union groups. The strike, which had begun in July, had been suspended in September to allow for negotiations. The sentences had been accompanied by fines equivalent to over a whole year’s full wages. The complaints of the workers concerned poverty, the high cost of living and corruption. There had also been a tragic aspect to the events. When being sentenced, one union leader had apparently smiled, for which he had been held in contempt of court and sentenced to three months’ imprisonment, during which he had fallen ill and died. It was clear that compliance with the Convention required respect for the actions of independent trade unions. She therefore called on the Committee to take action to ensure an improvement in the situation in the country.

The Worker member of Senegal recalled that, although Chad had ratified the Convention in 1998, it had not yet succeeded in applying it in either law or practice. The report of the Committee of Experts highlighted the persistent failures, along with the lack of any real will by the Government to establish procedures to ensure effective tripartite consultations. He recalled the provisions of Article 5(1)(a) concerning the circumstances in which consultations were compulsory, including government replies to questionnaires concerning items on the agenda of the International Labour Conference and government comments on proposed texts to be discussed by the Conference. The absence of reports or replies to the questions raised by the Committee of Experts revealed the Government’s desire to mask the reality. Unless it had denounced them, which was not the case, the Government was bound to respect ratified Conventions, particularly by sending detailed information on the consultations required on the issues covered by Article 5 of the Convention. Instead of engaging in consultation, the Government had decided to bring trade union officials before the courts and sentence them to penalties which, although suspended, still amounted to a significant financial burden. Such acts should be condemned. Under the Convention, consultations should be undertaken at appropriate intervals fixed by agreement, at least once a year. In a national context in which the national plan had been left devoid of all content, the Government should be invited to request technical assistance from the Office.

The Government representative emphasized that the current situation was the result of a lack of communication between the Government and the ILO. The Government stressed that it had not neglected its obligation to submit reports, as illustrated by the fact that all the reports due in 2013 had been sent, which was why Chad was no longer on the list of cases of serious failure. The national employment policy had been approved and submitted to the Government for adoption. The Government reaffirmed that tripartite consultations had been held within the National Social Dialogue Committee, which had enabled a solution to be found to the social crisis experienced by the country. The misunderstanding between the Government and the social partners was regrettable, but it should be noted that the case mentioned by the previous speaker had been dismissed on appeal. The Government welcomed the proposal to provide it with technical assistance on the issues under consideration.

The Worker members recalled that the Governing Body had adopted a plan of action for the period 2010–16 for the widespread ratification and effective implementation of the governance Conventions, which demonstrated that those Conventions played an essential role in promoting full, productive and freely chosen employment, strengthening social cohesion through social dialogue and maintaining decent working conditions. Although the outline for an institutional framework to implement the Convention existed in Chad, it was important to provide the Government with technical assistance and to envisage technical cooperation for that purpose. A cooperation project would need to be established to encourage the exchange of good practices between the Higher Commission for Labour and Social Security and advisory committees in ILO member States that had useful experience on the subject of implementing the Convention.

The Employer members stated that it was important to focus on the weaknesses identified in the implementation of the Convention. It would appear that there were shortcomings in social dialogue in the country. The Government should therefore be encouraged to strengthen its capacity and its interaction with the representatives of employers and workers. It would also be important to improve its compliance with its reporting obligations so that there could be a better understanding of the national situation by the Office. They therefore encouraged the Government to take decisive measures to improve social dialogue and bring the tripartite partners together.

Conclusions

The Committee took note of the information provided by the Government and the discussion that ensued.

The Committee noted that the outstanding issues concerned the operation of consultation mechanisms and the lack of information on the effective tripartite consultations required by the Convention.

The Committee noted the Government’s indication of the establishment of the Higher Committee for Labour and Social Security in April 2003 and the National Committee on Social Dialogue in November 2009, as well as some discussions that took place between the Government and the trade unions. The Committee noted that the Government did not provide the information on the consultations held between representatives of the Government, employers’ and workers’ organizations on the issues provided for in the Convention related to international labour standards.

The Committee regretted the absence of reports by the Government since 2009 and stressed the importance of social dialogue and the practice of tripartism between governments and the representative organizations of workers and employers as provided for by this Convention. The Committee invited the Government to take all appropriate measures to ensure effective functioning of the procedures required by this governance Convention. The Committee also invited the Government to seek ILO technical assistance including an exchange of good practices with other member States in order to strengthen social dialogue and to build an effective national mechanism in order to support tripartite consultation required by Convention No. 144.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

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

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

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

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

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

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

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

Articles 2 and 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention. Consultation mechanisms and effective tripartite consultations required by the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s report received in October 2009. The Government refers to a Higher Committee for Labour and Social Security which is tripartite in composition. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that no information is available on the consultations held during the period covered by the report on each of the items set out in Article 5(1). The Committee refers to the comments that it has been making since its examination of the first report and expresses the conviction that the Government and the social partners should endeavour to promote and strengthen tripartism and social dialogue on the matters covered by the Convention. The Committee refers to the 2008 Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalization, which reaffirms that “social dialogue and the practice of tripartism between governments and the representative organizations of workers and employers within and across borders are now more relevant to achieving solutions and to building up social cohesion and the rule of law through, among other means, international labour standards”. The Committee therefore hopes that the Government’s next report will contain detailed information on the consultations held on all the items covered by Article 5(1) of the Convention, and on the other points raised in its previous observations in relation to Articles 4 and 6 of the Convention.

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

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its 2006 observation, which read as follows:

Articles 2 and 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention. Consultation mechanisms and effective tripartite consultation required by the Convention. The Committee acknowledged in 2006, the national plan for the implementation of the African Union Plan of Action for the Promotion of Employment and Poverty Alleviation, published by the Ministry of the Public Service, Labour and Employment of Chad in June 2005, which one of the objectives is to promote social dialogue and tripartism. In Chad, social dialogue, in the form of a permanent consultation process with the social partners on problems relating to labour in the broadest sense of the term, has been institutionalized, but is inadequate in certain ways, mainly due to the weakness of the institutions set up for this purpose. In order to improve social dialogue, the national plan envisages providing these institutions with operating resources and reinforcing the capacity of the social partners through the provision of training and information. The Committee also noted that the social dialogue institutions – particularly the High Committee for Labour, Employment and Social Security – had been indicated by the Government in its previous reports as being in charge of the tripartite consultations required by the Convention. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on any progress that is made in reinforcing social dialogue institutions with a view to ensuring that the consultations held between representatives of the Government, employers and workers, on all the issues set forth in Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention, are effective within the meaning of Article 2, paragraph 1.

Article 4. Administrative support and training. The Committee noted that the Government indicates in its report that, under section 15 of Decree No. 184 of 16 April 2002, the operating costs of the permanent secretariat of the High Committee for Labour and Social Security rest with the State and are covered by the state budget. The Committee noted that, by virtue of section 2 of the Order of 3 May 2000, the main task of the national committee responsible for monitoring social dialogue in Chad is to make proposals concerning the continued training of the social partners and of the administration. The Committee asks the Government to describe all the arrangements made for the financing of any necessary training of participants in consultative procedures.

Article 6. Issuing of annual reports on the working of the procedures. The Committee noted that, under the terms of section 13, paragraph 1, of Decree No. 184 of 16 April 2002, minutes are prepared for each session of the High Committee for Labour and Social Security. The Committee asks the Government to indicate whether an annual report on the working of the procedures provided for in the Convention is issued or envisaged and, if not, to give particulars on the consultations that have taken place with the representative organizations on this question.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its 2006 observation which read as follows:

1. Articles 2 and 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention. Consultation mechanisms and effective tripartite consultation required by the Convention. The Committee acknowledged in 2006, the national plan for the implementation of the African Union Plan of Action for the Promotion of Employment and Poverty Alleviation, published by the Ministry of the Public Service, Labour and Employment of Chad in June 2005, which one of the objectives is to promote social dialogue and tripartism. In Chad, social dialogue, in the form of a permanent consultation process with the social partners on problems relating to labour in the broadest sense of the term, has been institutionalized, but is inadequate in certain ways, mainly due to the weakness of the institutions set up for this purpose. In order to improve social dialogue, the national plan envisages providing these institutions with operating resources and reinforcing the capacity of the social partners through the provision of training and information. The Committee also noted that the social dialogue institutions – particularly the High Committee for Labour, Employment and Social Security – had been indicated by the Government in its previous reports as being in charge of the tripartite consultations required by the Convention. The Committee asks the Government to provide information in its next report on any progress that is made in reinforcing social dialogue institutions with a view to ensuring that the consultations held between representatives of the Government, employers and workers, on all the issues set forth in Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention, are effective within the meaning of Article 2, paragraph 1.

2. Article 4. Administrative support and training. The Committee noted that the Government indicates in its report that, under section 15 of Decree No. 184 of 16 April 2002, the operating costs of the permanent secretariat of the High Committee for Labour and Social Security rest with the State and are covered by the state budget. The Committee noted that, by virtue of section 2 of the Order of 3 May 2000, the main task of the national committee responsible for monitoring social dialogue in Chad is to make proposals concerning the continued training of the social partners and of the administration. The Committee asks the Government to describe all the arrangements made for the financing of any necessary training of participants in consultative procedures.

3. Article 6. Issuing of annual reports on the working of the procedures. The Committee noted that, under the terms of section 13, paragraph 1, of Decree No. 184 of 16 April 2002, minutes are prepared for each session of the High Committee for Labour and Social Security. The Committee asks the Government to indicate whether an annual report on the working of the procedures provided for in the Convention is issued or envisaged and, if not, to give particulars on the consultations that have taken place with the representative organizations on this question.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

1. Consultation mechanisms and tripartite consultation required by the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s report received in March 2006, which contains certain indications in response to its previous comments. The Committee also acknowledges the national plan for the implementation of the African Union Plan of Action for the Promotion of Employment and Poverty Alleviation, published by the Ministry of the Public Service, Labour and Employment of Chad in June 2005. The Committee notes with interest that one of the national plan’s objectives is to promote social dialogue and tripartism. In Chad, social dialogue, in the form of a permanent consultation process with the social partners on problems relating to labour in the broadest sense of the term, has been institutionalized, but is inadequate in certain ways, mainly due to the weakness of the institutions set up for this purpose. In order to improve social dialogue, the national plan envisages providing these institutions with operating resources and reinforcing the capacity of the social partners through the provision of training and information. The Committee also notes that the social dialogue institutions – particularly the High Committee for Labour, Employment and Social Security – had been indicated by the Government in its previous reports as being in charge of the tripartite consultations required by the Convention. The Committee hopes that the Government will provide information in its next report on any progress that is made in reinforcing social dialogue institutions with a view to ensuring that the consultations held between representatives of the Government, employers and workers, on all the issues set forth in Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention, are effective within the meaning of Article 2, paragraph 1.

2. Administrative support and training. The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that, under section 15 of Decree No. 184 of 16 April 2002, the operating costs of the permanent secretariat of the High Committee for Labour and Social Security rest with the State and are covered by the State budget. The Committee notes that, by virtue of section 2 of the Order of 3 May 2000, the main task of the national committee responsible for monitoring social dialogue in Chad is to make proposals concerning the continued training of the social partners and of the administration. The Committee invites the Government to describe all the arrangements made for the financing of any necessary training of participants in consultative procedures (Article 4, paragraph 2).

3. Issuing of annual reports on the working of the procedures. The Committee notes that, under the terms of section 13, paragraph 1, of Decree No. 184 of 16 April 2002, minutes are prepared for each session of the High Committee for Labour and Social Security. The Committee asks the Government to indicate whether an annual report on the working of the procedures provided for in the Convention is issued or envisaged and, if not, to give particulars on the consultations that have taken place with the representative organizations on this question (Article 6).

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. 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 matters raised in its 2004 direct request, which read as follows:

1. The Committee notes the Government’s brief report, which was received in November 2003, indicating that the provisions of Convention No. 144 are effectively applied in Chad, that the Government gives priority to the promotion of social dialogue and that the consultative bodies envisaged by the Labour Code have been established. The Government also indicates that the Social Dialogue Steering Committee was created by Ministerial Order on 3 March 2003 and that the High Committee for Labour and Social Security was established in April 2003. Noting once again that the general nature of the information received does not allow it to assess in full the effect given to the provisions of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to provide a report containing precise information in reply to the questions raised in the report form, particularly on the following points.

2. Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention. The Committee asks the Government to describe the procedures which ensure effective consultations between representatives of the Government, of employers and of workers with respect to all the matters set out in Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

3. Article 3, paragraph 1. Please describe the manner in which the representatives of employers and workers are chosen for the purposes of the procedures covered by the Convention.

4. Article 4, paragraph 2. Please provide information on any arrangements made or envisaged for the financing of the training of participants in the consultative procedures covered by the Convention.

5. Article 5. The Committee recalls that the tripartite consultations covered by the Convention are essentially intended to promote the implementation of international labour standards and concern in particular the matters set forth and enumerated in Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide full and detailed information on the tripartite consultations held on the subject of:

(a)  government replies to questionnaires concerning items on the agenda of the International Labour Conference and government comments on proposed texts to be discussed by the Conference;

(b)  the proposals to be made to the National Assembly in connection with the submission of the instruments adopted by the Conference pursuant to article 19 of the Constitution of the Organization: the Government is asked to refer to the observation that has been made for several years on the failure to submit the instruments adopted at the eight sessions held between 1993 and 2003;

(c)  the re-examination at appropriate intervals of unratified Conventions and of Recommendations to which effect has not yet been given, to consider what measures might be taken to promote their implementation and ratification as appropriate;

(d)  questions arising out of reports to be made to the International Labour Office under article 22 of the Constitution of the Organization;

(e)  proposals for the denunciation of ratified Conventions.

6. Please provide information on the frequency of such consultations and on any recommendations resulting from these consultations.

7. Article 6. Please indicate whether an annual report on the working of the procedures provided for in the Convention is issued or envisaged and, if not, give particulars of the consultations that have taken place with the representative organizations on this question.

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

1. The Committee notes the Government’s brief report, which was received in November 2003, indicating that the provisions of Convention No. 144 are effectively applied in Chad, that the Government gives priority to the promotion of social dialogue and that the consultative bodies envisaged by the Labour Code have been established. The Government also indicates that the Social Dialogue Steering Committee was created by Ministerial Order on 3 March 2003 and that the High Committee for Labour and Social Security was established in April 2003. Noting once again that the general nature of the information received does not allow it to assess in full the effect given to the provisions of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to provide a report containing precise information in reply to the questions raised in the report form, particularly on the following points.

2. Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention. The Committee asks the Government to describe the procedures which ensure effective consultations between representatives of the Government, of employers and of workers with respect to all the matters set out in Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

3. Article 3, paragraph 1. Please describe the manner in which the representatives of employers and workers are chosen for the purposes of the procedures covered by the Convention.

4. Article 4, paragraph 2. Please provide information on any arrangements made or envisaged for the financing of the training of participants in the consultative procedures covered by the Convention.

5. Article 5. The Committee recalls that the tripartite consultations covered by the Convention are essentially intended to promote the implementation of international labour standards and concern in particular the matters set forth and enumerated in Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide full and detailed information on the tripartite consultations held on the subject of:

(a)  government replies to questionnaires concerning items on the agenda of the International Labour Conference and government comments on proposed texts to be discussed by the Conference;

(b)  the proposals to be made to the National Assembly in connection with the submission of the instruments adopted by the Conference pursuant to article 19 of the Constitution of the Organization: the Government is asked to refer to the observation that has been made for several years on the failure to submit the instruments adopted at the eight sessions held between 1993 and 2003;

(c)  the re-examination at appropriate intervals of unratified Conventions and of Recommendations to which effect has not yet been given, to consider what measures might be taken to promote their implementation and ratification as appropriate;

(d)  questions arising out of reports to be made to the International Labour Office under article 22 of the Constitution of the Organization;

(e)  proposals for the denunciation of ratified Conventions.

6. Please provide information on the frequency of such consultations and on any recommendations resulting from these consultations.

7. Article 6. Please indicate whether an annual report on the working of the procedures provided for in the Convention is issued or envisaged and, if not, give particulars of the consultations that have taken place with the representative organizations on this question.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. 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 matters raised in its direct request of 2000, which read as follows:

The Committee notes the Government’s first two reports on the application of the Convention. The Government indicates therein that the provisions of the Convention were complied with even before it was ratified and that employers’ and workers’ organizations are consulted regularly in accordance with the obligations incumbent on a member State of the ILO. The Committee wishes to indicate, however, that this information of a general nature does not allow it to appreciate fully the effect given to the various provisions of the Convention. It therefore requests the Government to supply with its next report more complete and detailed information on the application of all the Articles of the Convention, taking duly into account the questions asked under each of them in the report form.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. 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 matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

The Committee notes the Government’s first two reports on the application of the Convention. The Government indicates therein that the provisions of the Convention were complied with even before it was ratified and that employers’ and workers’ organizations are consulted regularly in accordance with the obligations incumbent on a member State of the ILO. The Committee wishes to indicate, however, that this information of a general nature does not allow it to appreciate fully the effect given to the various provisions of the Convention. It therefore requests the Government to supply with its next report more complete and detailed information on the application of all the Articles of the Convention, taking duly into account the questions asked under each of them in the report form.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s first two reports on the application of the Convention. The Government indicates therein that the provisions of the Convention were complied with even before it was ratified and that employers’ and workers’ organizations are consulted regularly in accordance with the obligations incumbent on a member State of the ILO. The Committee wishes to indicate, however, that this information of a general nature does not allow it to appreciate fully the effect given to the various provisions of the Convention. It therefore requests the Government to supply with its next report more complete and detailed information on the application of all the Articles of the Convention, taking duly into account the questions asked under each of them in the report form.