ILO-en-strap
NORMLEX
Information System on International Labour Standards
NORMLEX Home > Country profiles >  > Comments > All Comments

Display in: French - Spanish

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

The Committee notes with deep concern that the Government’s report, due since 2018, has not been received. In light of its urgent appeal launched to the Government in 2021, the Committee proceeds with the examination of the application of the Convention on the basis of the information at its disposal.
Article 1(a) of the Convention. Imposition of prison sentences involving compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. Over a number of years, the Committee has been requesting the Government to provide information on the application of certain provisions of the Penal Code under which penalties of imprisonment, which may involve compulsory prison labour (pursuant to sections 46 and 51 of the Penal Code), may be imposed in circumstances that may fall under Article 1(a) of the Convention, namely:
  • –sections 297 and 298 on offences against the prestige of the State and participation in political or social associations of an international nature; and
  • –section 301(1) on offences against the activities aimed at modifying by illegal means the Constitution of the State.
The Committee notes the lack of information available from the Government on the application in practice of the above provisions of the Penal Code. It observes that, in its 2018 concluding observations, the United Nations Human Rights Committee expressed specific concern about: (1) the criminalization of defamation, insult, criticism of public officials and blasphemy, which can be punished with imprisonment; (2) allegations of extensive interpretation of the concept of cybercrime by the Cybercrime Centre of the Internal Security Forces aimed at restricting freedom of expression; and (3) reports of the arrest and prosecution of individuals allegedly criticizing State authorities or political figures, including through social media. It further notes that, in its 2022 concluding observations, the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women expressed concerns about reports of harassment and excessive limitations on the right to freedom of expression for human rights defenders and the shrinking civic space in the State party, including allegations of mass surveillance of digital communications (CCPR/C/LBN/CO/3, 9 May 2018, paragraphs 33 and 45; and CEDAW/C/LBN/CO/6, 1 March 2022, paragraph 33).
In this regard, the Committee observes that several provisions of the Penal Code provide for penalties of imprisonment, which may involve compulsory prison labour, for certain activities that may fall within the scope of Article 1(a) of the Convention, namely activities through which persons express ideas or views opposed to the established political, economic or social system. The provisions in question are as follows:
  • –section 383 on insulting or threatening a public employee while doing their job;
  • –section 384 on insulting the president, flag or national emblem;
  • –section 386 on slander;
  • –section 388 on libel;
  • –section 389 on insult, slander and libel against judges not acting in their official capacity; and
  • –sections 582 and 584 on libel against private citizens.
The Committee recalls that, under Article 1(a) of the Convention, persons who, without recourse to violence, hold or express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system must not be subject to sanctions that would require them to work, including compulsory prison labour. It notes that, according to the Penal Code, prison labour is compulsory for persons convicted to extended imprisonment (section 46 provides that persons sentenced to extended imprisonment shall be employed on one of the activities organized by the prison administration). The Committee observes, in that regard, that there is a specific scheme for political offences, which are defined as intentional offences committed with a political motive (section 196 of the Penal Code). Indeed, under section 198, where the judge recognizes the political nature of an offence, extended imprisonment will be applied instead of hard labour, and simple imprisonment or forced residence instead of imprisonment with labour, except in cases of political offences against the external security of the State.
The Committee requests the Government to ensure that persons who peacefully hold or express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system are not punished with sanctions that would require them to work. In this regard, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of section 198 of the Penal Code in practice, indicating the criteria on which the judge determines the political nature of an offence, and to supply a copy of judicial decisions handed down in this respect. The Committee also requests the Government to provideinformation on how sections 297, 298, 301(1), 383, 384, 386, 388, 389, 582 and 584 of the Penal Code are applied in practice, including on: the number of cases referred to the Cybercrimes Bureau for investigation; the number of prosecutions initiated and convictions handed down; the nature of the penalties applied to those convicted on the basis of the above-mentioned provisions of the Penal Code. Please also indicate if the offences committed under these provisions of the Penal Code are deemed to be political offences pursuant to section 196 of the Penal Code.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

The Committee notes with deep concern that the Government’s report has not been received. It expects that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments. The Committee informs the Government that, if it has not supplied replies to the points raised by 1 September 2022, then it may proceed with the examination of the application of the Convention on the basis of the information at its disposal at its next session.
Repetition
Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sentences of imprisonment involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views. Over a number of years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to certain provisions of the Penal Code under which penalties of imprisonment involving compulsory prison labour (pursuant to section 46 of the Penal Code) may be imposed in circumstances falling under Article 1(a) of the Convention, namely:
  • – section 198(5) on political offences against the external security of the State;
  • – sections 297 and 298 on offences against the prestige of the State and participation in political or social associations of an international nature;
  • – section 301(1) on offences against the activities aimed at modifying by illegal means the Constitution of the State.
The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of the above provisions, supplying copies of court decisions illustrating their application.
The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that, in practice, prisoners only perform daily tasks of cleaning on their premises, and therefore no labour is imposed on them. The Government also indicates that the Committee’s requests of court decisions has been forwarded to the competent authorities, and no relevant court decisions on the application of the abovementioned provisions of the Penal Code were available.
The Committee observes that according to section 46 of the Penal Code, persons convicted for offences related to the application of sections 198(5), 297, 298 and 301(1) of the Penal Code are not exempted from the obligation to work. It also notes that the abovementioned provisions of the Penal Code are worded in terms broad enough to lend themselves to application as a means of punishment for the expression of views opposed to the established political, social or economic system. Moreover, any infringement of these provisions may lead to the imposition of a prison sentence under which compulsory prison labour may be required. Referring to its 2012 General Survey on the Fundamental Conventions, the Committee recalls that in the great majority of cases, labour imposed on persons as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law is not incompatible with the Convention, such as in the cases of the exaction of compulsory labour from common offenders convicted, for example, of robbery, kidnapping or other acts of violence or of having endangered the life or health of others, or numerous other offences. However, if a person is required to perform compulsory prison labour following a conviction for the holding or expression of certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political and social system, the situation is incompatible with the Convention which prohibits the imposition of compulsory prison labour as a sanction in these circumstances (paragraph 300). The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information on any cases of practical application of sections 198(5), 297, 298 and 301(1) of the Penal Code, including copies of relevant court decisions illustrating their application and indicating the penalties imposed, as soon as such information becomes available, in order to enable the Committee to ascertain whether they are applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

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

The Committee notes with concern that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.
Repetition
Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sentences of imprisonment involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views. Over a number of years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to certain provisions of the Penal Code under which penalties of imprisonment involving compulsory prison labour (pursuant to section 46 of the Penal Code) may be imposed in circumstances falling under Article 1(a) of the Convention, namely:
  • – section 198(5) on political offences against the external security of the State;
  • – sections 297 and 298 on offences against the prestige of the State and participation in political or social associations of an international nature;
  • – section 301(1) on offences against the activities aimed at modifying by illegal means the Constitution of the State.
The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of the above provisions, supplying copies of court decisions illustrating their application.
The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that, in practice, prisoners only perform daily tasks of cleaning on their premises, and therefore no labour is imposed on them. The Government also indicates that the Committee’s requests of court decisions has been forwarded to the competent authorities, and no relevant court decisions on the application of the abovementioned provisions of the Penal Code were available.
The Committee observes that according to section 46 of the Penal Code, persons convicted for offences related to the application of sections 198(5), 297, 298 and 301(1) of the Penal Code are not exempted from the obligation to work. It also notes that the abovementioned provisions of the Penal Code are worded in terms broad enough to lend themselves to application as a means of punishment for the expression of views opposed to the established political, social or economic system. Moreover, any infringement of these provisions may lead to the imposition of a prison sentence under which compulsory prison labour may be required. Referring to its 2012 General Survey on the Fundamental Conventions, the Committee recalls that in the great majority of cases, labour imposed on persons as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law is not incompatible with the Convention, such as in the cases of the exaction of compulsory labour from common offenders convicted, for example, of robbery, kidnapping or other acts of violence or of having endangered the life or health of others, or numerous other offences. However, if a person is required to perform compulsory prison labour following a conviction for the holding or expression of certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political and social system, the situation is incompatible with the Convention which prohibits the imposition of compulsory prison labour as a sanction in these circumstances (paragraph 300). The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information on any cases of practical application of sections 198(5), 297, 298 and 301(1) of the Penal Code, including copies of relevant court decisions illustrating their application and indicating the penalties imposed, as soon as such information becomes available, in order to enable the Committee to ascertain whether they are applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

The Committee notes with concern that the Government’s report has not been received. It expects that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.
Repetition
Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sentences of imprisonment involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views. Over a number of years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to certain provisions of the Penal Code under which penalties of imprisonment involving compulsory prison labour (pursuant to section 46 of the Penal Code) may be imposed in circumstances falling under Article 1(a) of the Convention, namely:
  • – section 198(5) on political offences against the external security of the State;
  • – sections 297 and 298 on offences against the prestige of the State and participation in political or social associations of an international nature;
  • – section 301(1) on offences against the activities aimed at modifying by illegal means the Constitution of the State.
The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of the above provisions, supplying copies of court decisions illustrating their application.
The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that, in practice, prisoners only perform daily tasks of cleaning on their premises, and therefore no labour is imposed on them. The Government also indicates that the Committee’s requests of court decisions has been forwarded to the competent authorities, and no relevant court decisions on the application of the abovementioned provisions of the Penal Code were available.
The Committee observes that according to section 46 of the Penal Code, persons convicted for offences related to the application of sections 198(5), 297, 298 and 301(1) of the Penal Code are not exempted from the obligation to work. It also notes that the abovementioned provisions of the Penal Code are worded in terms broad enough to lend themselves to application as a means of punishment for the expression of views opposed to the established political, social or economic system. Moreover, any infringement of these provisions may lead to the imposition of a prison sentence under which compulsory prison labour may be required. Referring to its 2012 General Survey on the Fundamental Conventions, the Committee recalls that in the great majority of cases, labour imposed on persons as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law is not incompatible with the Convention, such as in the cases of the exaction of compulsory labour from common offenders convicted, for example, of robbery, kidnapping or other acts of violence or of having endangered the life or health of others, or numerous other offences. However, if a person is required to perform compulsory prison labour following a conviction for the holding or expression of certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political and social system, the situation is incompatible with the Convention which prohibits the imposition of compulsory prison labour as a sanction in these circumstances (paragraph 300). The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information on any cases of practical application of sections 198(5), 297, 298 and 301(1) of the Penal Code, including copies of relevant court decisions illustrating their application and indicating the penalties imposed, as soon as such information becomes available, in order to enable the Committee to ascertain whether they are applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments initially made in 2017.
Repetition
Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sentences of imprisonment involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views. Over a number of years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to certain provisions of the Penal Code under which penalties of imprisonment involving compulsory prison labour (pursuant to section 46 of the Penal Code) may be imposed in circumstances falling under Article 1(a) of the Convention, namely:
  • – section 198(5) on political offences against the external security of the State;
  • – sections 297 and 298 on offences against the prestige of the State and participation in political or social associations of an international nature;
  • – section 301(1) on offences against the activities aimed at modifying by illegal means the Constitution of the State.
The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of the above provisions, supplying copies of court decisions illustrating their application.
The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that, in practice, prisoners only perform daily tasks of cleaning on their premises, and therefore no labour is imposed on them. The Government also indicates that the Committee’s requests of court decisions has been forwarded to the competent authorities, and no relevant court decisions on the application of the abovementioned provisions of the Penal Code were available.
The Committee observes that according to section 46 of the Penal Code, persons convicted for offences related to the application of sections 198(5), 297, 298 and 301(1) of the Penal Code are not exempted from the obligation to work. It also notes that the abovementioned provisions of the Penal Code are worded in terms broad enough to lend themselves to application as a means of punishment for the expression of views opposed to the established political, social or economic system. Moreover, any infringement of these provisions may lead to the imposition of a prison sentence under which compulsory prison labour may be required. Referring to its 2012 General Survey on the Fundamental Conventions, the Committee recalls that in the great majority of cases, labour imposed on persons as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law is not incompatible with the Convention, such as in the cases of the exaction of compulsory labour from common offenders convicted, for example, of robbery, kidnapping or other acts of violence or of having endangered the life or health of others, or numerous other offences. However, if a person is required to perform compulsory prison labour following a conviction for the holding or expression of certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political and social system, the situation is incompatible with the Convention which prohibits the imposition of compulsory prison labour as a sanction in these circumstances (paragraph 300). The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information on any cases of practical application of sections 198(5), 297, 298 and 301(1) of the Penal Code, including copies of relevant court decisions illustrating their application and indicating the penalties imposed, as soon as such information becomes available, in order to enable the Committee to ascertain whether they are applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

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

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sentences of imprisonment involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views. Over a number of years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to certain provisions of the Penal Code under which penalties of imprisonment involving compulsory prison labour (pursuant to section 46 of the Penal Code) may be imposed in circumstances falling under Article 1(a) of the Convention, namely:
  • -section 198(5) on political offences against the external security of the State;
  • -sections 297 and 298 on offences against the prestige of the State and participation in political or social associations of an international nature;
  • -section 301(1) on offences against the activities aimed at modifying by illegal means the Constitution of the State.
The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of the above provisions, supplying copies of court decisions illustrating their application.
The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that, in practice, prisoners only perform daily tasks of cleaning on their premises, and therefore no labour is imposed on them. The Government also indicates that the Committee’s requests of court decisions has been forwarded to the competent authorities, and no relevant court decisions on the application of the abovementioned provisions of the Penal Code were available.
The Committee observes that according to section 46 of the Penal Code, persons convicted for offences related to the application of sections 198(5), 297, 298 and 301(1) of the Penal Code are not exempted from the obligation to work. It also notes that the abovementioned provisions of the Penal Code are worded in terms broad enough to lend themselves to application as a means of punishment for the expression of views opposed to the established political, social or economic system. Moreover, any infringement of these provisions may lead to the imposition of a prison sentence under which compulsory prison labour may be required. Referring to its 2012 General Survey on the Fundamental Conventions, the Committee recalls that in the great majority of cases, labour imposed on persons as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law is not incompatible with the Convention, such as in the cases of the exaction of compulsory labour from common offenders convicted, for example, of robbery, kidnapping or other acts of violence or of having endangered the life or health of others, or numerous other offences. However, if a person is required to perform compulsory prison labour following a conviction for the holding or expression of certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political and social system, the situation is incompatible with the Convention which prohibits the imposition of compulsory prison labour as a sanction in these circumstances (paragraph 300). The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information on any cases of practical application of sections 198(5), 297, 298 and 301(1) of the Penal Code, including copies of relevant court decisions illustrating their application and indicating the penalties imposed, as soon as such information becomes available, in order to enable the Committee to ascertain whether they are applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.
Repetition
Preliminary remarks concerning the effect on the application of the Convention of legislation establishing the obligation to work of persons convicted to a sentence of imprisonment. The Committee wishes to recall, further to the comments that it has been making for a number of years that the imposition of sentences of imprisonment involving compulsory prison labour may lie within the scope of the Convention. The Convention prohibits the imposition of compulsory prison labour upon persons who express certain political views, who oppose the established political, social or economic system or who participate in strikes, by reason of these activities. Where national legislation provides for sentences of imprisonment in such circumstances, the Committee examines in the first place whether or not, under the terms of such sentences of imprisonment, the convicted person is required to perform compulsory labour. Under the terms of the national legislation of Lebanon, persons convicted to a sentence of imprisonment are subject to the obligation to work (section 46 of the Penal Code). In this context, the Committee has drawn the Government’s attention to the provisions of the legislation which place limits on the exercise of certain civil rights and public liberties, the violation of which is punishable by sentences of imprisonment. Persons who, by failing to comply with these limits, are convicted to a sentence of imprisonment are also subject to the obligation to work, as set out in the Penal Code.
Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sentences of imprisonment involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views. With reference to its previous comments concerning political offences, the Committee noted that, under the terms of section 198(5) of the Penal Code, exemption from the obligation to work for political offences is not applicable to offences against the external security of the State. For certain of these offences, imprisonment may be imposed in circumstances falling within the scope of Article 1(a) of the Convention; this may be the case under sections 297 and 298 of the Penal Code (offences against the prestige of the State and participation in political or social associations of an international nature).
The Committee notes the Government’s reference to the communication of the General Department of National Security, confirming that persons convicted for offences against the external security of the State are not exempt from the obligation to work.
Noting the Government’s indication, the Committee expresses the firm hope that it will not fail to provide information on the application in practice of the above provisions, with copies of court rulings defining or illustrating their scope.
For a number of years, the Committee has also been drawing the Government’s attention to section 301(1) of the Penal Code, which provides that activities aimed at modifying by illegal means the Constitution of the State shall be punished by imprisonment (involving the obligation to work under section 46 of the Penal Code) for a minimum period of five years. It requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of section 301(1) of the Penal Code.
The Committee recalls once again that the Convention does not prohibit the punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence or incite the use of violence, armed resistance or an uprising. However, the Convention prohibits any recourse to forced labour, including compulsory prison labour, as punishment for the peaceful expression of non-violent views that are critical of government policy and the established political system.
In the absence of information on this point from the Government, the Committee expresses the firm hope that the necessary measures will be taken to ensure that the peaceful expression of views opposed to the established political system is not punished by imprisonment involving the obligation to work, as is the case under the terms of section 301(1) of the Penal Code. While awaiting the adoption of such measures, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the effect given to this section in practice, including copies of any relevant court rulings, with an indication of the penalties imposed.

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

Preliminary remarks concerning the effect on the application of the Convention of legislation establishing the obligation to work of persons convicted to a sentence of imprisonment. The Committee wishes to recall, further to the comments that it has been making for a number of years, that the imposition of sentences of imprisonment involving compulsory prison labour may lie within the scope of the Convention. The Convention prohibits the imposition of compulsory prison labour upon persons who express certain political views, who oppose the established political, social or economic system or who participate in strikes, by reason of these activities. Where national legislation provides for sentences of imprisonment in such circumstances, the Committee examines in the first place whether or not, under the terms of such sentences of imprisonment, the convicted person is required to perform compulsory labour. Under the terms of the national legislation of Lebanon, persons convicted to a sentence of imprisonment are subject to the obligation to work (section 46 of the Penal Code). In this context, the Committee has drawn the Government’s attention to the provisions of the legislation which place limits on the exercise of certain civil rights and public liberties, the violation of which is punishable by sentences of imprisonment. Persons who, by failing to comply with these limits, are convicted to a sentence of imprisonment are also subject to the obligation to work, as set out in the Penal Code.
Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sentences of imprisonment involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views. With reference to its previous comments concerning political offences, the Committee noted that, under the terms of section 198(5) of the Penal Code, exemption from the obligation to work for political offences is not applicable to offences against the external security of the State. For certain of these offences, imprisonment may be imposed in circumstances falling within the scope of Article 1(a) of the Convention; this may be the case under sections 297 and 298 of the Penal Code (offences against the prestige of the State and participation in political or social associations of an international nature).
The Committee notes the Government’s reference to the communication of the General Department of National Security, confirming that persons convicted for offences against the external security of the State are not exempt from the obligation to work.
Noting the Government’s indication, the Committee expresses the firm hope that it will not fail to provide information in its next report on the application in practice of the above provisions, with copies of court rulings defining or illustrating their scope.
For a number of years, the Committee has also been drawing the Government’s attention to section 301(1) of the Penal Code, which provides that activities aimed at modifying by illegal means the Constitution of the State shall be punished by imprisonment (involving the obligation to work under section 46 of the Penal Code) for a minimum period of five years. It requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of section 301(1) of the Penal Code.
The Committee recalls once again that the Convention does not prohibit the punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence or incite the use of violence, armed resistance or an uprising. However, the Convention prohibits any recourse to forced labour, including compulsory prison labour, as punishment for the peaceful expression of non-violent views that are critical of government policy and the established political system.
In the absence of information on this point from the Government, the Committee expresses the firm hope that the necessary measures will be taken to ensure that the peaceful expression of views opposed to the established political system is not punished by imprisonment involving the obligation to work, as is the case under the terms of section 301(1) of the Penal Code. While awaiting the adoption of such measures, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the effect given to this section in practice, including copies of any relevant court rulings, with an indication of the penalties imposed.

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

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:
Repetition
Article 1(a) of the Convention. Penal sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to sections 196 and 198 of the Penal Code concerning political offences. It noted that under section 198, where the judge recognizes the political nature of an offence, he will apply detention instead of forced labour and simple imprisonment or forced residence instead of imprisonment with the obligation to work. It also noted that section 196 defines political offences as intentional offences committed with a political motive, and requested the Government to supply copies of court decisions which could clarify the judge’s appreciation regarding the political nature of the offences. Noting the Government’s indication in its report that such information is not yet available, the Committee reiterates its hope that the information requested will be provided by the Government as soon as it becomes available.
In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that, under section 198 (fifth paragraph) of the Penal Code, exemption from the obligation to work for offences recognized as being of a political nature is not applicable to offences against the external security of the State. For certain of these offences, imprisonment may be imposed in circumstances falling within the scope of Article 1(a) of the Convention, which may be the case of sections 297 and 298 of the Penal Code (offences against the prestige of the State and political or social associations of an international nature). The Committee requested the Government to supply information on the application in practice of the abovementioned provisions, including copies of court decisions defining or illustrating their scope. Noting the Government’s indication in its report that no such information is available, the Committee reiterates its hope that the Government will not fail to communicate the information requested, as soon as it is available.
In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 301(1) of the Penal Code, which provides that activities aimed at modifying by illegal means the Constitution of the State shall be punished by detention for a minimum period of five years. The Committee noted that under section 46 of the Penal Code, persons sentenced to detention shall be employed on one of the activities organized by the prison administration. It recalled that the Convention prohibits any form of forced labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a punishment for persons expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system.
The Committee notes the Government’s statement in the report that section 301(1) does not apply to persons who express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, but to persons who perform acts contrary to the country’s security, by sowing discord among citizens and in the State.
The Committee points out, referring also to the explanations contained in paragraphs 152–166 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, that the Convention does not prohibit punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence or incite to the use of violence, armed resistance or an uprising. But sanctions involving compulsory labour are incompatible with the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the peaceful expression of non-violent views that are critical of government policy and the established political system. The Committee noted that the above provision of the Penal Code provides for penal sanctions involving compulsory labour in circumstances defined in terms which are wide enough to give rise to questions about its application in practice. It therefore requested the Government to communicate copies of the court decisions which could define or illustrate the scope of this provision.
The Committee reiterates its hope that, in the course of possible future revision of the Penal Code, the necessary measures will be taken in regard to this provision to ensure that no form of forced or compulsory labour is imposed in circumstances falling within the scope of Article 1(a) of the Convention. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee again requests the Government to supply information on the application of section 301(1) in practice, particularly in regard to sentences that have been handed down in application of this provision, and to supply copies of the relevant court decisions, as soon as such information becomes available. Noting also the Government’s indication that the system of compulsory labour in Lebanese prisons is not currently applied and prisoners undergo cultural and training sessions for their rehabilitation, the Committee requests the Government to clarify this situation, in connection with the application of section 46 of the Penal Code referred to above.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the Committee’s comments have been sent to the competent bodies, but no response has been received from these bodies so far. The Committee hopes that the next report will include full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Article 1, subparagraph a, of the Convention. Penal sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. 1. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to sections 196 and 198 of the Penal Code concerning political offences. It noted that under section 198, where the judge recognizes the political nature of an offence, he will apply detention instead of forced labour and simple imprisonment or forced residence instead of imprisonment with the obligation to work. It also noted that section 196 defines political offences as intentional offences committed with a political motive, and requested the Government to supply copies of court decisions which could clarify the judge’s appreciation regarding the political nature of the offences. Noting the Government’s indication in its report that such information is not yet available, the Committee reiterates its hope that the information requested will be provided by the Government as soon as it becomes available.

2. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that, under section 198 (fifth paragraph) of the Penal Code, exemption from the obligation to work for offences recognized as being of a political nature is not applicable to offences against the external security of the State. For certain of these offences, imprisonment may be imposed in circumstances falling within the scope of Article 1(a) of the Convention, which may be the case of sections 297 and 298 of the Penal Code (offences against the prestige of the State and political or social associations of an international nature). The Committee requested the Government to supply information on the application in practice of the abovementioned provisions, including copies of court decisions defining or illustrating their scope. Noting the Government’s indication in its report that no such information is available, the Committee reiterates its hope that the Government will not fail to communicate the information requested, as soon as it is available.

3. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 301(1) of the Penal Code, which provides that activities aimed at modifying by illegal means the Constitution of the State shall be punished by detention for a minimum period of five years. The Committee noted that under section 46 of the Penal Code, persons sentenced to detention shall be employed on one of the activities organized by the prison administration. It recalled that the Convention prohibits any form of forced labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a punishment for persons expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement in the report that section 301(1) does not apply to persons who express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, but to persons who perform acts contrary to the country’s security, by sowing discord among citizens and in the State.

The Committee points out, referring also to the explanations contained in paragraphs 152–166 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, that the Convention does not prohibit punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence or incite to the use of violence, armed resistance or an uprising. But sanctions involving compulsory labour are incompatible with the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the peaceful expression of non-violent views that are critical of government policy and the established political system. The Committee noted that the above provision of the Penal Code provides for penal sanctions involving compulsory labour in circumstances defined in terms which are wide enough to give rise to questions about its application in practice. It therefore requested the Government to communicate copies of the court decisions which could define or illustrate the scope of this provision.

The Committee reiterates its hope that, in the course of possible future revision of the Penal Code, the necessary measures will be taken in regard to this provision to ensure that no form of forced or compulsory labour is imposed in circumstances falling within the scope of Article 1(a) of the Convention. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee again requests the Government to supply information on the application of section 301(1) in practice, particularly in regard to sentences that have been handed down in application of this provision, and to supply copies of the relevant court decisions, as soon as such information becomes available. Noting also the Government’s indication that the system of compulsory labour in Lebanese prisons is not currently applied and prisoners undergo cultural and training sessions for their rehabilitation, the Committee requests the Government to clarify this situation, in connection with the application of section 46 of the Penal Code referred to above.

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

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Penal sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. 1. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to sections 196 and 198 of the Penal Code concerning political offences. It noted that under section 198, where the judge recognizes the political nature of an offence, he will apply detention instead of forced labour and simple imprisonment or forced residence instead of imprisonment with the obligation to work. It also noted that section 196 defines political offences as intentional offences committed with a political motive, and requested the Government to supply copies of court decisions which could clarify the judge’s appreciation regarding the political nature of the offences. Noting the Government’s indication in its report that such information is not yet available, the Committee reiterates its hope that the information requested will be provided by the Government as soon as it becomes available.

2. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that, under section 198 (fifth paragraph) of the Penal Code, exemption from the obligation to work for offences recognized as being of a political nature is not applicable to offences against the external security of the State. For certain of these offences, imprisonment may be imposed in circumstances falling within the scope of Article 1(a) of the Convention, which may be the case of sections 297 and 298 of the Penal Code (offences against the prestige of the State and political or social associations of an international nature). The Committee requested the Government to supply information on the application in practice of the abovementioned provisions, including copies of court decisions defining or illustrating their scope. Noting the Government’s indication in its report that no such information is available, the Committee reiterates its hope that the Government will not fail to communicate the information requested, as soon as it is available.

3. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 301(1) of the Penal Code, which provides that activities aimed at modifying by illegal means the Constitution of the State shall be punished by detention for a minimum period of five years. The Committee noted that under section 46 of the Penal Code, persons sentenced to detention shall be employed on one of the activities organized by the prison administration. It recalled that the Convention prohibits any form of forced labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a punishment for persons expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement in the report that section 301(1) does not apply to persons who express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, but to persons who perform acts contrary to the country’s security, by sowing discord among citizens and in the State.

The Committee points out, referring also to the explanations contained in paragraphs 152–166 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, that the Convention does not prohibit punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence or incite to the use of violence, armed resistance or an uprising. But sanctions involving compulsory labour are incompatible with the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the peaceful expression of non-violent views that are critical of government policy and the established political system. The Committee noted that the above provision of the Penal Code provides for penal sanctions involving compulsory labour in circumstances defined in terms which are wide enough to give rise to questions about its application in practice. It therefore requested the Government to communicate copies of the court decisions which could define or illustrate the scope of this provision.

The Committee reiterates its hope that, in the course of possible future revision of the Penal Code, the necessary measures will be taken in regard to this provision to ensure that no form of forced or compulsory labour is imposed in circumstances falling within the scope of Article 1(a) of the Convention. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee again requests the Government to supply information on the application of section 301(1) in practice, particularly in regard to sentences that have been handed down in application of this provision, and to supply copies of the relevant court decisions, as soon as such information becomes available. Noting also the Government’s indication that the system of compulsory labour in Lebanese prisons is not currently applied and prisoners undergo cultural and training sessions for their rehabilitation, the Committee requests the Government to clarify this situation, in connection with the application of section 46 of the Penal Code referred to above.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the Committee’s comments on the application of the Convention have been forwarded to the competent authorities, and that any replies received from such authorities will be communicated to the ILO. Since the Government’s report contains no further information in reply to previous comments, the Committee hopes that the next report will include full information on the following matters raised in its previous direct request:

Article 1(a) of the Convention. 1. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that, under section 198 of the Penal Code, where the judge recognizes the political nature of an offence, he will apply detention instead of forced labour and simple imprisonment or forced residence instead of imprisonment with the obligation to work. It also noted the Government’s reference to section 196 of the Penal Code, which defines political offences as intentional offences committed with a political motive, and requested the Government to supply copies of court decisions which could clarify the judge’s appreciation regarding the political nature of the offences. Having noted the Government’s indications in its latest report that such information is not yet available, the Committee reiterates its hope that the information requested will be provided by the Government as soon as it becomes available.

2. The Committee previously noted that, under section 198 (fifth paragraph) of the Penal Code, exemption from the obligation to work for offences recognized as being of a political nature is not applicable to offences against the external security of the State. For certain of these offences, imprisonment may be imposed in circumstances falling within the scope of Article 1(a) of the Convention, which may be the case of sections 297 and 298 of the Penal Code (offences against the prestige of the State and political or social associations of an international nature). The Committee requested the Government to supply information on the application in practice of the abovementioned provisions, including copies of court decisions defining or illustrating their scope. Having noted the Government’s indication that no such decisions are available, the Committee reiterates its hope that the Government will not fail to communicate the information requested, as soon as it is available.

3. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 301(1) of the Penal Code, which provides that activities aimed at modifying by illegal means the Constitution of the State shall be punished by detention for a minimum period of five years. The Committee noted that, under section 46 of the Penal Code, persons sentenced to detention shall be employed on one of the activities organized by the prison administration. It recalled that the Convention prohibits any form of forced labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a punishment for persons expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system.

Referring to the explanations given in paragraphs 133-140 of its General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour, the Committee reiterates its hope that, in the course of possible future revision of the Penal Code, the necessary measures will be taken in regard to these provisions to ensure that no form of forced or compulsory labour is imposed in circumstances falling within the scope of Article 1(a) of the Convention. Pending the revision, the Committee again requests the Government to supply information on the application in practice of section 301(1) of the Penal Code, particularly in regard to sentences that have been handed down in application of this provision and to supply copies of the relevant court decisions, as soon as such information becomes available.

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

Article 1(a) of the Convention. 1. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that, under section 198 of the Penal Code, where the judge recognizes the political nature of an offence, he will apply detention instead of forced labour and simple imprisonment or forced residence instead of imprisonment with the obligation to work. It also noted the Government’s reference to section 196 of the Penal Code, which defines political offences as intentional offences committed with a political motive, and requested the Government to supply copies of court decisions which could clarify the judge’s appreciation regarding the political nature of the offences. Having noted the Government’s indications in its latest report that such information is not yet available, the Committee reiterates its hope that the information requested will be provided by the Government as soon as it becomes available.

2. The Committee previously noted that, under section 198 (fifth paragraph) of the Penal Code, exemption from the obligation to work for offences recognized as being of a political nature is not applicable to offences against the external security of the State. For certain of these offences, imprisonment may be imposed in circumstances falling within the scope of Article 1(a) of the Convention, which may be the case of sections 297 and 298 of the Penal Code (offences against the prestige of the State and political or social associations of an international nature). The Committee requested the Government to supply information on the application in practice of the abovementioned provisions, including copies of court decisions defining or illustrating their scope. Having noted the Government’s indication that no such decisions are available, the Committee reiterates its hope that the Government will not fail to communicate the information requested, as soon as it is available.

3. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 301(1) of the Penal Code, which provides that activities aimed at modifying by illegal means the Constitution of the State shall be punished by detention for a minimum period of five years. The Committee noted that, under section 46 of the Penal Code, persons sentenced to detention shall be employed on one of the activities organized by the prison administration. It recalled that the Convention prohibits any form of forced labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a punishment for persons expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system.

Referring to the explanations given in paragraphs 133-140 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, the Committee reiterates its hope that, in the course of possible future revision of the Penal Code, the necessary measures will be taken in regard to these provisions to ensure that no form of forced or compulsory labour is imposed in circumstances falling within the scope of Article 1(a) of the Convention. Pending the revision, the Committee again requests the Government to supply information on the application in practice of section 301(1) of the Penal Code, particularly in regard to sentences that have been handed down in application of this provision and to supply copies of the relevant court decisions, as soon as such information becomes available.

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

The Committee has noted the Government’s reply to its earlier comments.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. 1. The Committee previously noted that under section 198 of the Penal Code, where the judge recognizes the political nature of an offence, the judge will apply detention instead of forced labour and simple imprisonment or forced residence instead of imprisonment with the obligation to work. It also noted the Government’s reference to section 196 of the Penal Code, which defines political offences as intentional offences committed with a political motive, and requested the Government to supply copies of court decisions which could clarify the judge’s appreciation regarding the political nature of the offences. Having noted the Government’s indications in the report that such information is not yet available, the Committee expresses the hope that the information requested will be provided by the Government with its next report.

2. In its earlier comments, the Committee observed that, under section 198 (fifth paragraph) of the Penal Code, exemption from the obligation to work for offences recognized as being of a political nature is not applicable to offences against the external security of the State. For certain of these offences, imprisonment may be imposed in circumstances falling within the scope of Article 1(a) of the Convention, which may be the case of sections 297 and 298 of the Penal Code (offences against the prestige of the State and political or social associations of an international nature). The Committee requested the Government to supply information on the application in practice of the abovementioned provisions, including copies of court decisions defining or illustrating their scope. The Committee hopes that copies of such court decisions, if any, will be communicated by the Government with its next report.

3. The Committee previously noted that, under section 301 of the Penal Code, activities aimed at modifying by illegal means the Constitution of the State shall be punished by detention for a minimum period of five years (first paragraph) and that the sentence will be life imprisonment if there was resort to violence (second paragraph). It also noted that section 46 of the Penal Code provides that persons sentenced to detention shall be employed on one of the activities organized by the prison administration.

While noting the Government’s explanations concerning the right of persons sentenced to detention to choose the type of their employment and to be employed outside the prison only with their consent, the Committee observes that, in terms of section 46, such persons are under obligation to perform labour. The Committee recalls in this connection that the Convention prohibits any form of forced labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a punishment for persons expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system.

The Committee also recalls that the protection of the Convention is not restricted to activities expressing or demonstrating divergent views in the framework of established principles. Consequently, if certain activities are intended to bring about fundamental changes to the state institutions, that does not constitute grounds for considering that they fall outside the protection of the Convention for as long as recourse is not had to violent methods for the purpose of reaching the desired result, as provided in section 301(2).

The Committee hopes that the above considerations will be taken into account in the course of possible future revision of the Penal Code. Pending the revision, it requests the Government to supply information on the application in practice of section 301(1) of the Penal Code, particularly in regard to sentences that have been handed down in application of this provision and to supply copies of the relevant court decisions.

Article 1(d). 4. The Committee previously noted that, under the terms of section 342 of the Penal Code, any coalition of more than 20 persons which attempts or begins action with the aim of suspending inter-urban or international transport, postal, telegraphic or telephone communications, or a public water or electricity distribution service, is punishable with imprisonment and a fine. Section 343, read in conjunction with section 342, provides for one year’s imprisonment for anyone who has led or maintained or attempted to lead or to maintain a concerted work stoppage by means of a gathering on public roads or places or by occupying workplaces.

The Committee has noted the Government’s indications in its reports that, in accordance with the Law on Arbitration, Mediation and Collective Agreements, strikes are authorized solely during the period between the failure of mediation and the commencement of arbitration and that, in addition, the duration of the strike may not exceed 15 days. The Government also indicated in its report received in September 1999 that disturbances caused by strikers during legal or illegal strikes will be sanctioned in accordance with the laws in force.

The Committee recalls that the provisions for compulsory arbitration enforced with sanctions comprising compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, must be limited in scope to essential services in the strict sense of the term (namely, those whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population).

The Committee again requests the Government to supply information on the application in practice of section 342 of the Penal Code, including copies of the relevant court decisions, and to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that sanctions involving an obligation to work cannot be imposed for participation in strikes.

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

Article 1(a) of the Convention.  1.  In its previous direct request, the Committee noted that under section 198 of the Penal Code, where the judge recognizes the political nature of an offence, he will apply detention instead of forced labour and instead of imprisonment with the obligation to work, simple imprisonment or forced residence. The Committee requested the Government to indicate the criteria on which the judge determines the political nature of an offence and to supply the texts of court decisions handed down on this subject.

In its report, the Government refers to section 196 of the Penal Code which defines political offences as intentional offences committed with a political motive. The Committee requests the Government to supply the texts of court decisions which could clarify the judge’s appreciation regarding the political nature of the offences.

2.  The Committee observes that section 198(5) of the abovementioned Penal Code provides that exemption from the obligation to work for offences recognized as being of a political nature is not applicable to offences against the external security of the State. For certain of these offences, imprisonment may be imposed in circumstances falling within the scope of Article 1(a) of the Convention. This is the case of sections 297 and 298 of the Penal Code (offences against the prestige of the State and political or social associations of an international nature). The Committee requests the Government to supply with its next report information on any cases of application of the abovementioned provisions, including copies of court decisions handed down, to permit the Committee to ascertain that application of these provisions has no impact on the application of Article 1(a) of the Convention.

3.  In regard to the provisions of the Penal Code concerning internal security of the State, the Committee notes that, under section 301, activities aimed at modifying by illegal means the Constitution of the State shall be punished by detention for a minimum period of five years (first paragraph) and that the sentence will be life imprisonment if there was resort to violence (second paragraph).

In its previous direct request, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the situation of political prisoners sentenced to detention, given that section 46 of the Penal Code provides that persons sentenced to detention shall be employed on one of the activities organized by the prison administration.

The Committee recalls that the Convention prohibits any form of forced labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a punishment for persons expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system.

The Committee also recalls that the protection of the Convention is not restricted to activities expressing or demonstrating divergent views in the framework of established principles. Consequently, if certain activities are intended to bring about fundamental changes to the state institutions, that does not constitute grounds for considering that they fall outside the protection of the Convention for as long as recourse is not had to violent methods for the purpose of reaching the desired result, as provided in section 301(2).

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the practical application of section 301(1) of the Penal Code, particularly in regard to sentences that have been handed down in application of this provision and to supply copies of the relevant judgements.

Article 1(d).  4.  The Committee notes that under the terms of section 342 of the Penal Code, any coalition of more than 20 persons which attempts or begins action with the aim of suspending inter-urban or international transport, postal, telegraphic or telephone communications, or a public water or electricity distribution service will be punished with imprisonment and a fine. Section 343, read in conjunction with section 342, provides one year’s imprisonment for anyone who has led or maintained or attempted to lead or to maintain a concerted work stoppage by means of a gathering on public roads or places or by occupying workplaces.

The Committee notes that, according to the Government’s report, strikes are authorized solely during the period between the failure of mediation and the commencement of arbitration and that, in addition, the duration of the strike may not exceed 15 days. The Government also indicates that disturbances caused by strikers during legal or illegal strikes will be sanctioned in accordance with the laws in force.

The Committee recalls that the provisions for compulsory arbitration, subject to sanctions comprising compulsory labour, and including compulsory prison labour, must be limited in scope to essential services in the strict sense of the term (namely, those whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population).

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the practical application of section 342 of the Penal Code and to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that sanctions involving the obligation to work cannot be imposed for participation in strikes.

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

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its reports for 1995, 1996 and 1997 on the application of the Convention. It would be grateful if the Government would provide information on the following points in its next report:

Article 1(a) of the Convention. 1. The Committee notes section 198 of the Penal Code, under which sentences involving an obligation to work are not applied in cases where the judge recognizes the political nature of the offence, and it requests the Government to indicate the criteria on which the judge determines the political nature of an offence and to supply the texts of judicial decisions handed down in this respect. The Committee also notes that section 46 of the Penal Code provides that "persons sentenced to detention shall be employed on one of the activities organized by the prison administration" and requests the Government to indicate whether such a provision applies to political prisoners. Please also provide copies of any legislation respecting the press and publications.

Article 1(c). 2. The Committee notes the provisions of the Act of 17 September 1962 repealing sections 107 and 108 of the Labour Code of 23 September 1946. It notes that under section 2 of the above Act (as amended by the Act issued by Decree No. 9816 of 4 May 1968), any person violating the provisions of the Labour Code and the decrees and orders issued thereunder shall be liable to a fine and a sentence of imprisonment (involving the obligation to work under the provisions of the Penal Code) of from one to three months or to one of these two penalties. The Committee refers to the explanations contained in paragraphs 110 to 113 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, in which it indicated that sanctions for breaches of labour discipline, with penalties involving an obligation to perform work, fall within the scope of the Convention. Only breaches of labour discipline that impair or are liable to endanger the operation of essential services, or which are committed either in the exercise of functions that are essential to safety or in circumstances where life or health are in danger, are not covered by the protection set out in the Convention. The Committee hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures to restrict the application of sentences of imprisonment envisaged under section 2 above to cases in which the operation of essential services or life or health are in danger. It requests the Government to indicate in its next report the progress achieved in this respect.

3. The Committee also notes that, under the terms of section 131 of the Maritime Commercial Code, seafarers "on board ship and on land are bound to obey the orders of their superiors concerning the operation of the vessel". It would be grateful if the Government would indicate in its report the types of sanctions which are used against seafarers in the event of breaches of labour discipline and if it would provide copies of the labour regulations on board ship.

Article 1(d). 4. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate in its next report the manner in which the right to strike is regulated and the sanctions which are envisaged against persons who have participated in unlawful strikes.

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

The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply a detailed report in the form approved by the Governing Body.

© Copyright and permissions 1996-2024 International Labour Organization (ILO) | Privacy policy | Disclaimer