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

Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) - Kuwait (Ratification: 1968)

Display in: French - Spanish

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

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Freedom of career members of the armed forces to leave their service. In reply to the Committee’s previous request on the rules applicable to the resignation of career members of the armed forces, the Committee takes due note that the Government refers to the adoption of the Ministerial Decision No. 283 of 2018 containing the rules governing the service of non/commissioned officers and members of the armed forces. The Government indicates that, according to section 151 of that Ministerial Decision, members of the armed forced are entitled to submit a request to end their service based on the following conditions: (i) a resignation shall be in writing and free from any restriction or condition; (ii) the person concerned should have spent at least five years in effective service and not be under arrest or investigation or involved in a criminal or disciplinary proceeding until a final decision has been taken thereon; (iii) the resignation shall not be submitted during a war, armed operations, marital law, general mobilization, or during the execution of a penal or disciplinary sanction imposed on the person concerned; (iv) the person shall not be absent from work; and v) there should not be financial commitments in relation to sabbatical leave, scholarly holidays or a training session. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the number of requests to end service submitted by career members of the armed forces, indicating how many of these requests have been accepted or denied (in case of denial please indicate the reasons for that decision).
Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25. Trafficking in persons. The Committee previously noted the Law No. 91 of 2013 on Trafficking in Persons and Smuggling of Migrants and requested the Government to provide information on its implementation, in particular in relation to the protection of victims and the prosecution of perpetrators. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that to ensure the effective application of the anti-trafficking legislation, a national strategy to combat trafficking in persons and the smuggling of migrant workers was approved in February 2018 based on three pillars: (i) prevention, (ii) protection, and (iii) partnerships. The implementation of the strategy is under the responsibility of a National Committee under the Ministry of Justice.
In relation to the application of the Law No. 91 of 2013, the Government indicates that 23 cases of trafficking in persons were decided by courts in 2019, 42 cases in 2020, and 54 cases in 2021. The penalties imposed on perpetrators varied from imprisonment from one year to 20 years. The Committee notes the creation of a national referral system which includes six phases: (i) identification of victims of trafficking in persons; (ii) notification, referral, and certification of trafficked victims; (iii) investigation and litigation; iv) protection and assistance; v) voluntary return of victims; and (vi) reintegration. The Government indicates that it has implemented measures to strengthen the skills of national enforcement bodies to combat trafficking in persons. Since the adoption of the referral system in December 2019, public prosecutors have investigated 85 cases of trafficking in persons involving 240 accused persons and 541 victims. In all cases, the prosecution has ended with sentences convicting accused persons.
The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that victims of trafficking in persons are well treated and being informed that they are not being accused nor being held accountable. They are kept in a safe place (in the shelter centre of migrant workers which belongs to the Public Authority for Manpower) and provided medical care.
The Committee requests the Government to continue taking measures to prevent and combat trafficking in persons, and to provide information on the implementation of the national strategy, including on the difficulties encountered and the results achieved, as well as on any evaluation carried out in this respect. The Committee also requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken to identify and investigate trafficking cases, both for labour and sexual exploitation, including measures to strengthen the capacities of law enforcement bodies in this regard. Finally, it requests the Government to provide detailed information on the measures taken to provide assistance and protection to victims of trafficking in persons, indicating the number of victims who have been identified, rehabilitated and returned to their home countries.

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

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Protection of migrant workers against forced labour. 1. Migrant domestic workers. The Committee previously took note of Act No. 68/2015 on Employment of Domestic Workers, which establishes the specific obligations of employers with respect to recruitment, wages, hours of work, rest time and leave of domestic workers, as well as a complaints mechanism, and requested the Government to ensure its application. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report of the adoption of Ministerial Decision 22/2022 on the Executive Regulations of Act No. 68 of 2015, which further regulates the recruitment, working conditions, transfer of employment and repatriation of migrant domestic workers.
(a) Retention of passports. The Committee welcomes the enactment of section 23(7) of Ministerial Decision 22/2022, which prohibits employers from keeping in their possession any papers or personal identification documents belonging to the domestic worker, except with the worker´s consent. The Committee recalls that, in the past, it took note of cases of confiscation of passports of domestic workers by their employers. The Committee is of the view that given the intrinsic situation of vulnerability and dependence in which migrant domestic workers may find themselves, it cannot be excluded that domestic workers’ consent to give the employer custody of their identification documents could be obtained under pressure or threat. The Committee recalls that the retention of passports is an element which increases the risk of domestic workers not being able to leave their employment when they are victims of practices that could amount to forced labour. Therefore, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that the provisions of section 23(7) of Ministerial Decision 22/2022 are implemented in practice by guaranteeing that under no circumstances can employers retain identification documents without the domestic workers’ freely given consent, and that such workers are informed of and can readily access complaints mechanisms to report situations of illegal passport retention by the employer. To this extent, the Committee requests the Government to provide statistics on the number of complaints lodged by migrant domestic workers in this regard and the corresponding penalties imposed on employers.
(b) Transfer of employment and absconding workers. The Committee notes that section 38 of Ministerial Decision 22/2022 provides that, for reasons of public interest, the Public Authority for Manpower (PAM) can issue an order to transfer the domestic worker from an employer to another if: the employer dies; the domestic worker requests to be transferred to the employer’s husband or wife in the event of separation; the employer definitively leaves the country; the female domestic worker marries a husband in the country; the female domestic worker requests to be transferred to her husband’s residence; the employer fails to meet the eligibility conditions or a final judgment sentences him/her to prison; and an act, statement or gesture of sexual connotation is proven to be committed by the employer or those living with him/her against the domestic worker. The Committee further notes that the Government indicates that the transfer should be made with the approval of the competent authority within the Ministry of Interior, which shall certify that the worker agrees to the transfer. However, the Committee notes with concern that section 38 of Ministerial Decision 22/2022 provides for restrictive and limited grounds for the PAM to issue an order of transfer of employment without the employer’s consent. Hence, section 38 does not cover other situations of abusive working practices as grounds for a transfer of employment without the employers’ consent, such as non-payment of wages, non-respect of established working hours or rest periods, or situations of physical or psychological violence without sexual connotation. The Committee also observes that, pursuant to section 16 of Act No. 68/2015, the domestic worker may not be able to voluntarily terminate the contract before its end (through notice of its termination two months in advance).
The Committee further notes that in its 2021 concluding observations, the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights expressed its concern at the continued reports of exploitation and abuse of migrant domestic workers by employers, and referred to the continued existence of the crime of “absconding” (unjustified discontinuation of work), which makes migrant workers vulnerable to abuse and forced labour (E/C.12/KWT/CO/3 paragraphs 20 and 22). In this respect, the Committee notes that section 51 of Act 68/2015 provides that, in the event a domestic worker absconds from her/his service post, the Ministry of Interior will take action to deport the worker to her/his country. It further notes that, according to section 35 of Ministerial Decision 22/2022, an employer is prevented from filing an absconding report against a domestic worker after the latter files a complaint to the competent department, provided that the domestic worker is registered among the residents of the migrant workers’ accommodation centre. According to section 36 of this Ministerial Decision, the domestic worker’s residence permit can be extended until the complaint is resolved, and he or she receives all due entitlements. Furthermore, pursuant to Ministerial Decree 27/2021, the employer of a worker who is absent without an excuse shall inform the PAM after seven days have passed from the date of the worker’s absence. The notice submitted to the PAM must be displayed in a visible place at the workplace in order for the worker to be made aware of the notice, and the employer who submits the notice of the worker’s unexcused absence is prohibited from allowing the worker to resume their work until an investigation into the incident is concluded (sections 49 and 50). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, in 2021, 994 complaints related to abandonment of work were under consideration by the courts.
The Committee observes that Act No 68/2015 does not foresee the termination of the employment relation by the domestic worker before the expiry of the initial employment contract (the maximum duration of the contract not being provided for in the Act) without approval of the employer. Furthermore, as indicated above, Ministerial Decision 22/2022 provides for the possibility of the domestic worker to transfer employment without the employer’s consent only in a few very specific cases. The Committee is of the view that these two circumstances increase the dependence of migrant domestic workers and their vulnerability to situations of abuse that could amount to forced labour. It recalls that the effect of statutory provisions preventing termination of employment of large duration by means of notice of reasonable length is to turn a contractual relationship based on the will of the parties into service by compulsion of law, and is thus incompatible with the Convention. Therefore, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to enable migrant domestic workers to transfer their employment at certain intervals and after having given reasonable notice during the duration of the contract. It also requests the Government to continue taking measures to ensure that, both in law and practice, migrant domestic workers can access the necessary mechanisms to defend themselves against complaints of absconding in situations when their rights have not been respected, and to indicate how many absconding cases have been brought by employers under section 51 of Act No. 68/2015 and how they have been decided. It also requests the Government to provide information on the number of domestic workers who have left their employment and been repatriated to their country of origin.
(c) Law enforcement. In response to the Committee’s request for information on the application of Act No. 68/2015, the Government indicates that, since 2019, the PAM is the entity responsible for domestic workers. The PAM has the responsibility to sensitize society with respect to the rights and obligations derived from the employment of a domestic worker, and to raise awareness among domestic workers about their rights using information brochures in multiple languages. It also undertakes periodic inspections of recruitment agencies and offices of domestic workers and follows up on complaints to ensure effective compliance with Act No. 68/2015. The Government adds that, since 2020, employers who want to hire a foreign domestic worker must use the standardized labour contracts that have been approved by the competent authority.
The Government emphasizes that the PAM seeks to resolve complaints in an amicable manner. If complaints cannot be resolved amicably, the PAM forwards them to the competent court. In cases of infringement or violation of the rights of domestic workers confirmed by the PAM, the employer will be prevented from obtaining entry visas for a period of six months. The complaint shall be later referred to the competent court for the imposition of further sanctions corresponding to the degree and type of the infringement. In 2021, a total of 1,487 complaints were filed by domestic workers against an employer (1,150 of which were resolved amicably) and three were filed against a recruitment office or agency.
The Committee requests the Government to continue taking the necessary measures to ensure that migrant domestic workers enjoy their rights provided for in the legislation, and to facilitate their access to mechanisms to defend themselves against situations of exploitation and abuse that could amount to forced labour, as well as reprisals. It also requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that migrant domestic workers who are victims of forced labour receive the necessary psychological, social, medical and legal assistance. Lastly, it requests the Government to provide information on: (1) the type of sanctions imposed by the PAM (in addition to the suspension of granting of entry visas to the employers for six months) and national courts on employers and/or recruitment agencies who infringe the labour rights of migrant domestic workers; and (2) investigations and prosecutions undertaken in relation to situations of forced labour of migrant domestic workers.
2. Migrant workers in private enterprises. The Committee notes that, according to section 48 of Act No. 6/2010 concerning labour in the private sector, the worker shall have the right to terminate his or her work contract without notification if the employer does not abide by the terms of the contract or the provisions of the law; the worker was assaulted by either the employer or his deputy; continuing work would endanger his or her safety and health; the employer or his deputy committed an act of cheating or fraud with regard to work conditions; the employer has accused the worker of committing a punishable act and the final verdict acquitted the worker, or the employer or his deputy has committed an act that violates public morals against the worker.
The Committee further notes that, pursuant to section 1 of Administrative Decision No. 712/2017 on the transfer of employment for workers in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), a transfer is permitted only within the SMEs sector, after three years of continuous employment and with the approval of the employer. It also notes that, pursuant to section 2 of Administrative Decision No. 842/2015, private sector workers who work on government-contracted projects are permitted to transfer only to another government-contracted project implemented by the same sponsor and only after the end of the contract. Transfer without permission of the employer is permitted only after three years from the issuance of the work permit. If the worker wishes to transfer prior to the end of this period without the consent of the original employer, he or she shall file a complaint with the PAM (Section 6 of Administrative Decision No. 842/2015).
The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether migrant workers in private enterprises who have the right to terminate employment under the circumstances established in Act No. 6/2010 can also transfer employment without the permission of the employer and without being asked to leave the country. It also requests the Government to provide information on the number of complaints before the Public Authority of Manpower submitted by migrant private sector workers working for government-contracted projects, who wish to transfer employment without the consent of the original employer and before the end of the labour contract, as well as the outcome of such complaints. It requests the Government to indicate whether this procedure of transfer also applies with respect to migrant workers in small and medium enterprises.
The Committee is raising other issues in a direct request addressed directly to the Government.

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

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Freedom of career members of the armed forces to leave their service. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate whether under Decision No. 13/1998, military officers and other career members of the armed forces can freely leave their service and under which conditions. The Committee noted the Government’s indication that the work of the members of the armed forces is different from the work performed in other sectors, and it is therefore regulated by specific standards which allow them to freely leave their service or under other decisions. The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the conditions of resignation of military officers and other career members of the armed forces.
The Committee notes the absence of information in the Government’s report on this point. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the manner in which military officers and other career members of the armed forces can freely leave their service under Decision No. 13/1998 or under other decisions. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of the abovementioned Decision or other relevant text.

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

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Freedom of domestic workers to terminate their employment. For a number of years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the exclusion of migrant domestic workers from the protection of the Labour Code, and has requested the Government to take the necessary measures to adopt a protective framework of employment relations that is specifically tailored to the difficult circumstances faced by this category of workers. In this regard, the Committee previously noted the adoption of a certain number of decrees and ministerial decisions, including Ministerial Decision No. 617/1992 regulating the rules and procedures for obtaining licences for the private recruitment agencies supplying domestic workers and similar workers, as well as Ministerial Decision No. 1182/2010, which defines the rights and obligations of each party in the recruitment contract (the agency, the employer, the employee). The Committee further noted that in their communications the Confederation of Indonesia Prosperity Trade Union (KSBSI) and the Indonesia Migrant Worker Union (SBMI) alleged that more than 660,000 foreign domestic workers from Asia and Africa work in Kuwait. They also indicated that embassies of labour-sending countries in Kuwait were receiving several complaints from domestic workers about non-payment of wages, excessively long working hours without rest, and physical, sexual and psychological abuse. Domestic workers had few avenues of redress, as they were excluded from the labour law and the immigration laws prohibited them from leaving or changing jobs without their employer’s consent. In this regard, the Committee took note of the adoption in 2015 of Law No. 68/2015 on Employment of Domestic Workers, which provides for the respective obligations of the employer and the worker, particularly with regard to the model contract (hours of work, remuneration and rest time, as well as holidays). The Committee noted that the Law expressly prohibits passport confiscation by the employer (sections 12 and 22). The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of Law No. 68/2015.
The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that, the number of complaints submitted by employers to the Department of Domestic Labour reached 346 in 2018 (compared to 1,768 in 2017), whereas 73 complaints were submitted by migrant domestic workers (compared to 388 in 2017). The Government also adds that 108 cases were referred to the competent court, and that in 2018, migrant domestic workers were compensated the amount of 2,560 Kuwaiti dinars (US$8,400) as back-salary and other entitlements. Regarding the termination of employment, the Committee also notes that the contract between the employer and the domestic worker is concluded for a period of two years and can be renewed for a similar period, unless one of the two parties notifies the other at least two months before the end of the two-year contract. Upon termination of the contract between the domestic worker and the employer, the employer must pay the domestic worker all of her/his entitlements as set forth in the contract and stipulated in this law. The contract may be renewed automatically if neither of the two parties expresses her/his wish to not renew the contract at least two months before the end of the contract. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that the provisions of Law No. 68/2015 are effectively applied and enforced. The Committee also requests the Government to continue to provide statistical information on the number of domestic workers who have filed complaints with the Domestic Labour Department and the outcome of such complaints. With regard to the right of domestic workers to freely terminate their employment, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the modalities and the length of the procedure for changing an employer for migrant domestic workers, including statistical information on the number of transfers that have occurred recently.
Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25. Trafficking in persons. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the adoption of Law No. 91 of 2013 on Trafficking in Persons and Smuggling of Migrants. It noted that the Law provides for penalties for offences related to trafficking in persons for both sexual and labour exploitation (15 years and a fine). With regard to the penal sanctions imposed for the exaction of forced labour, the Committee noted that the enslavement, purchase or offering of a person is punishable by a term of five years of imprisonment and a fine (section 185 of the Penal Code). The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of Law No. 91 of 2013 on Trafficking in Persons.
The Committee notes the Government’s indication that within the Public Prosecutor’s Office, a specialized Anti-Trafficking Unit has been set up to expedite cases of trafficking. The Government also indicates that the Anti-Trafficking Unit has taken a series of measures regarding the protection of victims of trafficking, including coordination with the relevant institutions in order to provide medical and psychological care and the provision of legal assistance, including access to file formal grievances.
The Committee also notes that in its concluding observations of 27 November 2017, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) of the United Nations welcomed the legal and institutional measures taken by the State party to counter trafficking in persons, including efforts to investigate cases and prosecute perpetrators. However, it is concerned about the low number of prosecutions, convictions and sentences imposed under Act No. 91 of 2013 on Trafficking in Persons and Smuggling of Migrants (CEDAW/C/KWT/CO/5 paragraph 28). The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken by the Anti-Trafficking Unit for victims of trafficking, as well as the results achieved, including information on the number of trafficked persons who have benefited from the Unit’s services. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the number of investigations and prosecutions carried out, and the penalties applied in cases of trafficking in persons, both for purposes of sexual and labour exploitation.
The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

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

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Freedom of career members of the armed forces to leave their service. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate whether under Decision No. 13/1998, military officers and other career members of the armed forces can freely leave their service and under which conditions. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the work of the members of the armed forces is different from the work performed in other sectors, and it is therefore regulated by specific standards which allow them to freely leave their service or under other decisions. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the manner in which military officers and other career members of the armed forces can freely leave their service under Decision No. 13/1998 or under other decisions. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of the abovementioned Decision or other relevant text.

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

The Committee notes the observations of the Confederation of Indonesia Prosperity Trade Union (KSBSI) and the Indonesia Migrant Worker Union (SBMI), received on 10 July 2015.
Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Freedom of domestic workers to terminate their employment. For a number of years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the exclusion of migrant domestic workers from the protection of the Labour Code, and has requested the Government to take the necessary measures to adopt a protective framework of employment relations that is specifically tailored to the difficult circumstances faced by this category of workers. In this regard, the Committee previously noted the adoption of a certain number of decrees and ministerial decisions, including Decree Law No. 40/1992 and Ministerial Decision No. 617/1992 regulating the rules and procedures for obtaining licenses for the private recruitment agencies supplying domestic workers and similar workers, as well as Ministerial Decision No. 1182/2010, which defines the rights and obligations of each party in the recruitment contract (the agency, the employer, the employee).
The Committee notes that in their communications the KSBSI and the SBMI refer to a specific case of a migrant domestic worker who worked in Kuwait from 2003 until 2014, and who had been subject to forced labour practices, including physical abuse, harsh working conditions and passport confiscation. The KSBSI and the SBMI allege that more than 660,000 foreign domestic workers from Asia and Africa work in Kuwait. They generally migrate via recruitment agencies in their home countries that maintain relationships with agents in Kuwait. Most have agreed two-year contracts. The KSBSI and the SBMI also indicate that in 2009 embassies of labour-sending countries in Kuwait received more than 10,000 complaints from domestic workers about non-payment of wages, excessively long working hours without rest, and physical, sexual and psychological abuse. Many more cases of abuse probably remain unreported. Domestic workers have few avenues of redress. Kuwait’s labour law excludes domestic workers, while immigration laws prohibit them from leaving or changing jobs without their employer’s consent. Domestic workers who leave their job without their employer’s permission, even those fleeing abuse, may face immigration charges with criminal penalties, indefinite detention and deportation. Finally, the KSBSI and the SBMI emphasize that the major contributing factor to the vulnerability of domestic workers is Kuwait’s sponsorship system (kafala). The Aliens Residence Law of 1959, with its implementing regulations, remains the primary law establishing this system. According to the 1959 Law, sponsors decide whether a worker may change employer and can file paperwork with the immigration authorities to cancel a worker’s residence permit at any time.
The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that Law No. 68/2015 on employment of domestic workers has recently been adopted. The Committee duly notes that the Law provides for the respective obligations of the employer and the worker, particularly with regard to the model contract issued by the Ministry of the Interior in Arabic and English, hours of work, remuneration and rest time, as well as holidays. The Committee notes in particular that sections 12 and 22 of the Law expressly prohibit passport confiscation by the employer. It also notes that the contract between the employer and the domestic worker is concluded for a period of two years and can be renewed for a similar period, unless one of the two parties notifies the other at least two months before the end of the two-year contract. The Committee finally notes that domestic workers can file a complaint with the Domestic Labour Department and seek redress, for instance, for the non-payment of wages or for any other matter.
The Committee notes with concern the indications by the unions that migrant domestic workers are vulnerable to abusive practices and working conditions that may amount to the exaction of forced labour. While recognizing that Law No. 68/2015 on employment of domestic workers constitutes a positive step towards improving the protection of migrant domestic workers, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that it is effectively applied. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of Law No. 68/2015, including a copy of the model contract issued by the Ministry of the Interior, as well as data on the number of domestic workers who have filed complaints with the Domestic Labour Department and the outcome of such complaints. With regard to the right of domestic workers to freely terminate their employment, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the manner in which migrant domestic workers are appraised of the right to terminate their two-year employment contract, with a two-month notice period, and to change employer or leave the country.
Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25. 1. Trafficking in persons. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged, in both law and practice, to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons, including victim protection measures, as well as any intention to introduce penal provisions aimed specifically at the punishment of trafficking in persons. The Committee notes with interest the adoption of Law No. 91 of 2013 on trafficking in persons and smuggling of migrants, which aims to punish trafficking and related offences and provides for stringent penalties for offences related to trafficking in persons (15 years and a fine). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of the Law on trafficking, indicating the number of investigations and prosecutions carried out, and the penalties applied. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken to protect victims of trafficking.
2. Penal sanctions for the exaction of forced labour. In its earlier comments, the Committee observed that the national legislation examined previously provides only for pecuniary sanctions for the exaction of forced labour which should be punishable as a penal offence, with really adequate penalties. The Committee notes that the Government refers to several penal provisions, including: (i) sections 49 and 57 of Law No. 31 of 1970 amending the Penal Code; (ii) section 121 of the Penal Code prohibiting public officials or employees from forcing a worker to perform a job for the State or for any public body; and (iii) section 173 of the Penal Code, which provides for the imposition of penalties of imprisonment on anyone who threatens another person physically or damages his or her reputation or property with a view to forcing the victim to do something or to refrain from doing something. The Committee also notes that under section 185 of the Penal Code the enslavement, purchase or offering of a person is punishable by a term of five years of imprisonment and a fine. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of the above provisions of the Penal Code, indicating the number of investigations, convictions and the penalties applied.
The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

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

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Freedom of career military personnel to leave their service. Referring to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that Ministerial Decision No. 48/88, which specifies the statute of volunteers in the military service, has been repealed, and that Decision No. 13/1998 concerning the service of officers, has been promulgated, in this respect. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether under Decision No. 13/1998, military officers and other career members of the armed forces can freely leave their service and under which conditions. Please provide a copy of Decision No. 13/1998 referred to above.

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

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Freedom of domestic workers to terminate employment. Over a number of years, the Committee had been drawing the Government’s attention to the exclusion of migrant domestic workers from the protection of the Labour Code, and requested the Government to take the necessary measures to adopt a protective framework of employment relations that is specifically tailored to the difficult circumstances faced by this category of workers.
The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that certain decrees and ministerial decisions were adopted, which aim to provide domestic workers with more protection, including Decree Law No. 40/1992 and Ministerial Decision No. 617/1992 regulating the rules and procedures for obtaining licenses for the private recruitment agencies supplying domestic workers and similar workers, as well as Ministerial Decision No. 1182/2010, which defines the rights and obligations of each party in the recruitment contract (agency, the employer, the employee).
Regarding the freedom of domestic workers to terminate employment, the Government indicates that the worker should be informed about all the modalities of the recruitment contract before its signature, including the rules of termination of the contract, and that it is on a voluntary basis that the worker agrees to conclude the contract. In case of any dispute between the parties to the contract, they should resort to the Domestic Labour Department and apply Kuwaiti laws on all matters that do not have an explicit text in the contract (section 7(3)).
Furthermore, the Government indicates that under section 13 of Ministerial Decision No. 200/2011, regulating work in the private sector, it is possible to change the work permit for workers living in the country after a stay of one year without interruption, with the consent of the employer.
The Government further enumerates various measures taken to ensure the protection of migrant workers from abusive practices, including the draft Bill on the regulation of the employment of domestic workers; Ministerial Decision No. 194/2010 prohibiting the retention of identity documents of migrant workers in the private sector and in the oil sector; Ministerial Decision No. 103/a of 2012 establishing a telephone line for receiving complaints; the construction in 2007 of a shelter for domestic workers, as well as a new one that could receive around 700 workers. The Government also indicates that during 2011, 89,685 transfers to other employers of domestic workers occurred.
While noting this information, the Committee highlights the importance of taking effective action to ensure that the system of employment of migrant workers, especially migrant domestic workers, does not place the workers concerned in a situation of increased vulnerability, particularly when they are confronted with employment policies such as the visas “sponsorship” system and subjected to abusive employer practices, such as retention of passports, non payment of wages, deprivation of liberty, and physical and sexual abuses. Such practices could turn their employment into situations that could amount to forced labour.
The Committee therefore expresses once again the firm hope that the domestic workers Bill, referred to above, will be adopted without delay. It also requests the Government to provide information on any practical measures taken to protect migrant domestic workers from abusive practices that could amount to the exaction of forced labour, facilitated particularly by the visa “sponsorship” system, which prevent this category of workers from freely terminating their employment.
Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25. Trafficking in persons. Referring to its earlier comments, the Committee notes once again the Government’s indication that the Bill on combating trafficking in persons, which is registered under Decree No. 266 of 2008, has yet to be adopted by Parliament. It also notes the Government’s reference to section 185 of the Penal Code under which anyone who brings a person in or out of the country with the intention of selling that person as a slave, or anyone who buys or offers someone for sale, is punishable with five years of imprisonment and a fine.
The Committee once again expresses the firm hope that the Bill on combating trafficking in persons will be adopted in the near future and that the Government will provide a copy once it has been promulgated. Pending the adoption of the Bill, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of section 185 of the Penal Code, to which the Government refers in relation to the punishment of slavery like practices.
Article 25. Penal sanctions for the exaction of forced or compulsory labour. Over a number of years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to its national legislation that does not contain any specific provisions under which the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour is punishable as a penal offence. It invited the Government to take the necessary measures, for example by introducing a new provision to that effect in the legislation. The Government referred in this regard to various penal provisions (such as sections 49 and 57 of Law No. 31 of 1970, on the amendment of the Penal Code, or section 121 of the Penal Code of 1960) prohibiting public officials or employees from forcing a worker to perform a job for the State or for any public body, as well as to section 173 of the Penal Code, which provides for the imposition of penalties on anyone who threatens another person physically or with damage to his/her reputation or property with a view to forcing the victim to do something or to refrain from doing something.
The Committee recalls, that under Article 25 of the Convention, the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour shall be punishable as a penal offence, and the penalties imposed by law must be really adequate and strictly enforced. Noting that the Government’s report contains no information in this regard, the Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures in order to give full effect to Article 25 of the Convention. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the application of the above penal provisions in practice, supplying copies of the court decisions and indicating the penalties imposed.
The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

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

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Freedom of career military personnel to leave their service. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in the report concerning the Ministerial Decision No. 48/88, which specifies the statute of the volunteer in the army. The Government indicates in particular that the volunteer contract is concluded for a term of five years, after which the volunteer can leave the army. The Committee requests the Government to provide, in its next report, a copy of the Ministerial Decision No. 48/88 referred to above.

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

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Vulnerable situation of migrant workers. Freedom of domestic workers to terminate employment. The Committee previously noted that the new Labour Code (Law No. 6, 2010) excludes domestic workers from its scope (section 5), and that the rules governing the relationship between domestic workers and their employers are specified by a decision issued by the competent Minister.
The Government indicates in its report that the Minister of Interior Resolution No. 1182/2010, which amends some provisions of the previous Ministerial Decision No. 617/1992 on the rules and procedures for obtaining licenses for the agencies supplying domestic workers and similar workers, provides for certain guarantees for these categories of workers, such as the minimum wage, the maximum number of working hours, the right to weekly holidays and annual paid leave, as well as compensation for occupational injuries. The Committee notes that the model contract for recruiting domestic workers, annexed to the Ministerial Decision No. 617/1992, provides that the contract between the employer (“the sponsor”) and the domestic worker must be concluded for a number of years specified in the contract and is renewable for similar periods, unless one of the parties notifies the other of its intention not to renew the contract. Such notification should be made at least two months before the expiration of the contract (section 4).
Regarding the freedom of domestic workers to terminate employment, the Committee notes from the report of the International Organization for Migration (IOM) on “Labour migration from Indonesia. An overview of Indonesian migration to selected destinations in Asia and the Middle East” (2010) that all migrant workers, including domestic workers, are legally allowed to take up employment only with the “sponsor” who issues a residence visa under his authority, and cannot easily transfer from one employer to another without permission of the initial “sponsor”.
The Committee also notes that the situation of foreign workers, especially domestic workers, was discussed during the ILO technical assistance mission which visited the country in February 2010. Furthermore, following the discussion by the United Nations Human Rights Council of the Universal Periodic Review of Kuwait in September 2010, the Government reiterated its acceptance “to revoke the sponsorship system and replace it with regulations in accordance with international standards” (A/HRC/15/15/Add.1).
The Committee further understands that steps are being taken to draft a domestic workers bill, which, in addition to the mandatory model contract and other measures taken to support migrant domestic workers, could further improve domestic workers’ rights.
Referring to its comments addressed to the Government under the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111), the Committee highlights the importance of taking effective action to ensure that the system of employment of migrant workers, including migrant domestic workers, does not place the workers concerned in a situation of increased vulnerability, particularly when they are confronted with employment policies such as the visas “sponsorship” system and subjected to abusive employer practices, such as retention of passports, non-payment of wages, deprivation of liberty, and physical and sexual abuses. Such practices could turn their employment into situations that could amount to forced labour.
The Committee expresses the firm hope that the domestic workers bill referred to above will soon be adopted, and that it will provide for a protective framework of employment relations that is specifically tailored to the difficult circumstances faced by migrant domestic workers. In this regard, the Committee urges the Government to ensure that domestic workers are not prevented from exercising their right to freely terminate their employment and that they are fully protected from abusive practices and conditions that amount to the exaction of forced labour. Furthermore, the Committee hopes that, in its next report, the Government will provide information on the measures adopted to protect migrant workers, in particular from abuses that may arise from the visa “sponsorship” system.
Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25. Trafficking in persons. Referring to its earlier comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Bill on combating trafficking in persons still has to be adopted by Parliament and approved by the Emir, in accordance with the relevant constitutional procedures. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the bill on combating trafficking in persons will be adopted in the near future and that the Government will provide a copy, once it has been promulgated. Please supply information on the activities of the national committee for combating human trafficking, which shall be set up under section 15 of the bill. Pending the adoption of the bill, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of sections 138 and 173 of the Penal Code, to which the Government referred in its previous report in relation to the punishment of human trafficking.
Article 25. Penal sanctions for the exaction of forced or compulsory labour. In its earlier comments, the Committee observed that the national legislation does not contain any specific provisions under which the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour is punishable as a penal offence, and invited the Government to take the necessary measures, for example by introducing a new provision to that effect in the legislation. It noted that the Government referred in this regard to various penal provisions (such as sections 49 and 57 of Law No. 31 of 1970 on the amendment of the Penal Code, or section 121 of the Penal Code) prohibiting public officials or employees to force a worker to perform a job for the State or for any public body, as well as to section 173 of the Penal Code, which provides for the imposition of penalties on anyone who threatens another person physically or with damage to his reputation or property with a view to forcing the victim to do something or to refrain from doing something.
The Committee recalls, that under Article 25 of the Convention, the exaction of forced or compulsory labour shall be punishable as a penal offence, and the penalties imposed by law must be really adequate and strictly enforced. Noting that the Government’s report contains no information regarding this issue the Committee expresses the firm hope that the necessary measures will be taken in order to give full effect to Article 25 of the Convention. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee again requests the Government to communicate, in its next report, information on the application of the above penal provisions in practice, supplying copies of the court decisions and indicating the penalties imposed.
The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

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

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Freedom of career military personnel to leave their service. In its earlier comments, the Committee requested the Government to describe the criteria applied in accepting or rejecting a resignation submitted by a person wishing to resign from the army in accordance with the requirements laid down by Law No. 32 of 1967 (sections 104 and 105). The Committee observed that, under the above provisions, an application to resign may be either accepted or refused, but neither section 104 nor 105 establishes the criteria used for deciding whether a resignation presented in compliance with these provisions will or will not be accepted.

The Committee notes that, regarding the criteria applied in accepting or rejecting a resignation, the Government indicates in the first place the public interest of the State, followed by the interest of the person submitting the resignation, in the light of the political and international conditions, as well as the security considerations of the region. The Government also states that the period for the acceptance of the resignation is needed for the finalization of the procedures for leaving the service and handing over any military custody that the person was in charge of. As regards the number of cases in which such resignations were refused and the grounds for refusal, the Government indicates that there have been no cases in which a resignation was refused.

Recalling that career members of the armed forces, who have voluntarily engaged in the armed forces, should not be deprived of the right to leave the service in peacetime within a reasonable period (either at specified intervals, or with previous notice), the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide, in its future reports, information on the application of sections 104 and 105 in practice, indicating the number of cases in which such resignations were refused and the grounds for refusal.

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

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Freedom of domestic workers to terminate employment. The Committee notes the ILO technical assistance mission in February 2010, during which a tripartite workshop was held on report writing on international labour standards, and issues relating to the application of the Conventions were discussed, including the situation of foreign domestic workers. Referring to its earlier comments, in which the Committee expressed concern about the situation of domestic workers, the Committee notes that the new Labour Code (Law No. 6, 2010) excludes domestic workers from its scope (section 5). It notes, however, that the same section of the new Labour Code authorizes the competent minister to issue a decision concerning this category of workers specifying the rules governing the relationship between domestic workers and their employers. The Committee also notes Order No. 568 of 29 May 2005, issued by the Council of Ministers, supplied by the Government with its report, which provides for the establishment of a permanent committee for the regulation of the situation of migrant workers in the private sector, including domestic workers, as well as the information concerning the activities of this permanent committee. The Committee further notes sample copies of employment contracts concluded with domestic workers, in accordance with the model contract issued by the Ministry of Interior, communicated by the Government. Regarding the right of domestic workers to terminate employment, the Committee notes that, according to section 1 of Part V of the model contract, domestic workers can terminate employment by notifying their employer two months before the end of the contract. The Government also states, as regards a possibility for domestic workers to have recourse to courts, that these workers may initiate legal proceedings without any restrictions.

While noting this information, the Committee trusts that the Ministerial Decision specifying the rules governing the relationship between domestic workers and their employers, to which reference is made in the new Labour Code, will be issued in the near future, and that it will provide adequate protection for domestic workers as regards their freedom to terminate employment. The Committee asks the Government to communicate a copy of the Ministerial Decision, as soon as it is promulgated.

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25. Trafficking in persons. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate measures taken or envisaged, both in legislation and in practice, to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons, including victim protection measures, as well as any intention to introduce penal provisions aiming specifically at the punishment of trafficking in persons. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that a bill on combating trafficking in persons and the smuggling of migrants has been submitted to the Council of Ministers for its adoption before its referral to the Majlis El Ummah (Parliament). The Government indicates that the bill includes a definition of trafficking in persons and the provisions imposing penalties on perpetrators, as well as the provisions relating to the protection of victims of human trafficking. Furthermore, the bill provides for the setting up of a national committee for combating human trafficking, which will formulate policies and programmes in this field.

The Committee hopes that the bill on combating trafficking in persons will be passed in the near future and that the Government will provide a copy of the new anti-trafficking law, once it has been adopted. Please provide information on the activities of the national committee for combating human trafficking referred to above, in particular on the relevant policies and programmes, as well as the information on the application in practice of sections 138 and 173 of the Penal Code, to which the Government refers in its report in relation to the punishment of human trafficking.

Article 25. Penal sanctions for the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour. In its earlier comments, the Committee observed that the national legislation does not contain any specific provisions under which the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour is punishable as a penal offence, and invited the Government to take the necessary measures, for example by introducing a new provision to that effect in the legislation. The Government has referred in this regard to various penal provisions (such as sections 49 and 57 of Law No. 31 of 1970 on the amendment of the Penal Code, or section 121 of the Penal Code) prohibiting public officials or employees to force a worker to perform a job for the State or for any public body, as well as to section 173 of the Penal Code, which provides for the imposition of penalties on anyone who threatens another person physically or with damage to his reputation or property with a view to forcing the victim to do something or to refrain from doing something.

The Committee takes note of the Government’s view expressed in its report that the above penal provisions are sufficient to hinder a person from exacting labour from another person. The Government indicates, however, that the information on the application of these provisions in practice is not currently available.

The Committee recalls, referring to the explanations in paragraphs 135–140 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour that, in stipulating that the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour shall be punishable as a penal offence, and that States must ensure that the penalties imposed by law are really adequate and strictly enforced, Article 25 provides a repressive component which ultimately plays a preventive role, since effective punishment of perpetrators encourages victims to lodge complaints and has a dissuasive effect. The Committee therefore trusts that the necessary measures will be taken (e.g. on the occasion of the possible future revision of the Penal Code) in order to give full effect to Article 25 of the Convention. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee again requests the Government to communicate information on the application of the above penal provisions in practice, supplying copies of the court decisions and indicating the penalties imposed, as soon as such information becomes available.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

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

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Freedom of career military personnel to leave their service. Over a number of years, the Committee has been requesting the Government to supply details regarding the criteria applied in accepting or rejecting a resignation submitted by a person wishing to resign from the army in accordance with the requirements laid down by Law No. 32 of 1967 (sections 104 and 105). The Committee noted that the service is not automatically terminated upon delivery of a resignation which otherwise complies with the requirements of sections 104 and 105. It follows from the wording of the above sections that an application to resign may be either accepted or refused, but neither section 104 nor 105 establishes the criterion used for deciding whether a resignation presented in compliance with the conditions laid down in these provisions will or will not be accepted.

The Committee has noted the Government’s statement in the report that, before joining the army, a person should be well aware of his/her rights and obligations, including conditions and procedure of resignation. However, the Committee recalls that career members of the armed forces, who have voluntarily engaged in the armed forces, should not be deprived of the right to leave the service in peacetime within a reasonable period, either at specified intervals, or with previous notice (see, for example, the explanations provided in paragraphs 40, 46 and 96–97 of the Committee’s General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour). The Committee therefore hopes that the necessary measures will be taken with a view to amending the above sections 104 and 105, so as to bring them into conformity with the Convention. Pending such amendment, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of sections 104 and 105 in practice, indicating the number of cases in which such resignations were refused and the grounds for refusal, as well as the criteria applied in accepting or rejecting a resignation presented in conformity with these sections.

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

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Freedom of domestic workers to terminate employment. In its earlier comments, the Committee expressed concern about the conditions under which domestic servants can leave their employment and their possibility to have recourse to courts if necessary. The Committee noted that the Labour Code currently in force excludes domestic workers. It also noted the Government’s indications that the new draft Labour Code would cover this category of workers and that, under section 5 of the draft Labour Code, the competent minister would make an order specifying the rules governing the relationship between domestic servants and their employers. Having noted that the new Labour Code has not yet been adopted, the Committee requested the Government to supply a copy of Order No. 362, of 4 April 2004, issued by the Council of Ministers, which provides for the establishment of a permanent committee for the regulation of the situation of migrant workers in the private sector, including domestic workers, under the chairmanship of the Minister of Social Affairs and Labour.

The Committee trusts that the new Labour Code, once adopted, will provide adequate protection for domestic workers as regards their freedom to terminate employment, and that the Government will communicate a copy of the new Code, as soon as it is adopted. The Committee again requests the Government to communicate a copy of the Council of Minister’s Order No. 362, which, as the Government indicated, was attached to the report, but has not been received in the ILO. Please also provide information on the activities of the permanent committee on migrant workers referred to above, as well as sample copies of contracts of employment concluded with domestic workers in accordance with the model contract issued by the Ministry of Interior.

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25. Trafficking in persons. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication in its report that the victims of forced labour have the right to turn to the authorities, though without being allowed to stay in the country during the civil action unless their legal residence allows them to do so. The Committee asked the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to allow the victims of trafficking to turn to the authorities and to stay in the country at least for the duration of court proceedings.

In its latest report, the Government merely states that victims of trafficking, as any other persons suffering from unjust acts, have the right to turn to the authorities and to courts to defend their rights. The Committee refers in this connection to the explanations provided in paragraphs 73–85 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour, where it observed that victims of trafficking are often perceived by the authorities as illegal aliens and that they should be granted permission to stay in the country to defend their rights and should be efficiently protected from reprisals if they are willing to testify; the protection of victims of trafficking may also contribute to law enforcement and to the effective punishment of perpetrators.

The Committee hopes that the Government will indicate, in its next report, measures taken or envisaged both in legislation and in practice, to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons, including victim protection measures, such as, for example, protection of victims willing to testify from reprisals by the exploiters or any measures to encourage the victims to turn to the authorities and to stay in the country at least for the duration of court proceedings. Please also indicate whether there is an intention to introduce penal provisions aiming specifically at the punishment of trafficking in persons.

Article 25. Penal sanctions for the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour. The Committee previously noted that the legislation does not contain any specific provision under which the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour is punishable as a penal offence, and invited the Government to take the necessary measures, for example by introducing a new provision to that effect in the legislation. The Committee noted that the Government had referred in its reports to various penal provisions (such as sections 49 and 57 of Law No. 31 of 1970 on the amendment of the Penal Code, or section 121 of the Penal Code) prohibiting public officials or employees to force a worker to perform a job for the State or for any public body, as well as to section 173 of the Penal Code, which provides for the imposition of penalties on anyone who threatens another person physically or with damage to his reputation or property with a view to forcing the victim to do something or to refrain from doing something.

The Committee pointed out that the abovementioned provisions do not appear to be sufficient to give effect to Article 25 of the Convention which stipulates that “the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour shall be punishable as a penal offence”, and that “it shall be an obligation on any Member ratifying this Convention to ensure that the penalties imposed by law are really adequate and strictly enforced”.

The Committee expresses the firm hope that the Government will take the necessary measures (e.g. through the adoption of the new Labour Code or through the amendment of the Penal Code) in order to give full effect to this Article of the Convention. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee asks the Government to provide information on the application of the above penal provisions in practice, supplying copies of the court decisions and indicating the penalties imposed.

The Committee is also addressing a request on certain other points directly to the Government.

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

Freedom of career military personnel to leave their service. Over a number of years, the Committee has been requesting the Government to supply details regarding the criteria applied in accepting or rejecting a resignation submitted by a person wishing to resign from the army in accordance with the requirements laid down by Law No. 32 of 1967 (sections 104 and 105). The Committee noted that it is the obligation of the person seeking to resign to continue service in the armed forces until the resignation is accepted, which means that the service is not automatically terminated upon delivery of a resignation which otherwise complies with the requirements of sections 104 and 105. It noted that neither section 104 nor 105 establishes the criterion used for deciding whether a resignation presented in compliance with the conditions laid down in these provisions will or will not be accepted.

As the Committee repeatedly pointed out, referring also to paragraphs 33 and 72 of its General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour, career members of the armed forces, who have voluntarily engaged in the armed forces, should not be deprived of the right to leave the service in peacetime within a reasonable period, either at specified intervals, or with previous notice. Having noted the Government’s indication in the report that there have been no new developments on this subject, the Committee requests the Government once again to indicate clearly the criteria applied in accepting or rejecting a resignation presented in conformity with sections 104 and 105 of the abovementioned Law, as well as the number of cases in which such resignations were refused and the grounds for refusal.

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

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention

1. Freedom of domestic workers to terminate employment. In its earlier comments, the Committee expressed concern about the conditions under which domestic servants can leave their employment and their possibility to have recourse to courts if necessary. The Committee noted that the Labour Code currently in force excludes domestic workers. It also noted the Government’s indications that the new draft Labour Code would cover this category of workers and, pursuant to section 5 of the draft Labour Code, the competent Minister would make an order specifying the rules governing the relationship between domestic servants and their employers. Having noted that the new Labour Code has not yet been adopted, the Committee requested the Government to supply a copy of any ministerial order or other legislative text specifying the rules governing the relationship between domestic servants and their employers.

The Committee notes from the Government’s report that the Council of Ministers issued Order No. 362, of 4 April 2004, concerning the establishment of a permanent committee for the regulation of the situation of migrant workers in the private sector, including domestic workers, under the chairmanship of the Minister of Social Affairs and Labour. It also notes a model contract for migrant domestic workers and similar categories, prepared by the Ministry of Interior, which contains provisions governing their employment, including a provision concerning termination of an employment contract by either party, subject to prior notice.

While noting this information with interest, the Committee reiterates the firm hope that the new Labour Code, once adopted, will provide adequate protection for domestic workers as regards their freedom to terminate employment, and that the Government will communicate a copy of the new Code, as soon as it is adopted. The Committee would appreciate it if, pending the adoption of these provisions, the Government would provide information on the activities of the permanent committee on migrant workers referred to above, as well as sample copies of contracts of employment concluded with domestic workers in accordance with the model contract issued by the Ministry of Interior. Please also communicate a copy of the Council of Minister’s Order No. 362, which was referred to by the Government as annexed to the report, but has not been received in the ILO.

2. Trafficking in persons for the purpose of exploitation. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted the Government’s statement in its reply to the Committee’s 2000 general observation on the subject that the victims of forced labour have the right to refer to the authorities, though without being allowed to stay in the country during the civil action unless their legal residence allows them to do so. The Committee asked the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to allow the victims of forced labour to stay in the country at least for the duration of court proceedings.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in the report that section 22 of Act No. 17 of 1959, which governs foreigners’ residence, authorizes foreigners on whom a repatriation order has been issued in accordance with the law, to ask for a grace period not exceeding three months, subject to submitting a guarantee. The Government adds that a foreign worker who has received an order to leave the country in accordance with the law, but who has a civil case before the court, is authorized to mandate a lawyer or any other person to represent him in the civil case.

While noting this information, the Committee hopes that the Government will indicate any other measures taken or contemplated to encourage the victims to turn to the authorities, such as, e.g., protection of victims willing to testify from reprisals by the exploiters. Please also indicate whether there is an intention to introduce penal provisions aiming specifically at the punishment of trafficking in persons for the purpose of exploitation.

Article 25. Penal sanctions for the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that the legislation does not contain any specific provision under which the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour is punishable as a penal offence, and invited the Government to take the necessary measures, for example by introducing a new provision to that effect in the legislation. The Committee noted that the Government had referred in its reports to various penal provisions (such as sections 49 and 57 of Law No. 31 of 1970 on the amendment of the Penal Code, or section 121 of the Penal Code) prohibiting public officials or employees to force a worker to perform a job for the State or for any public body, as well as to section 173 of the Penal Code, which provides for the imposition of penalties on anyone who threatens another person physically or with damage to his reputation or property with a view to forcing the victim to do something or to refrain from doing something.

The Committee pointed out that the abovementioned provisions do not appear to be sufficient to give effect to Article 25 of the Convention which stipulates that "the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour shall be punishable as a penal offence", and that "it shall be an obligation on any Member ratifying this Convention to ensure that the penalties imposed by law are really adequate and strictly enforced".

The Committee reiterates its hope that the Government will take the necessary measures  in order to give full effect to this Article of the Convention. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee asks the Government to provide information on the application of the above penal provisions in practice, supplying copies of the court decisions and indicating the penalties imposed.

The Committee is also addressing a request on certain other points directly to the Government.

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

Freedom of career military personnel to leave their service. Over a number of years, the Committee has been requesting the Government to supply details regarding the criteria applied in accepting or rejecting a resignation submitted by a person wishing to resign from the army in accordance with the requirements laid down by Law No. 32 of 1967 (sections 104 and 105). The Committee noted that it is the obligation of the person seeking to resign to continue service in the armed forces until the resignation is accepted, which means that the service is not automatically terminated upon delivery of a resignation which otherwise complies with the requirements of sections 104 and 105. It noted that neither section 104 nor 105 establishes the criterion used for deciding whether a resignation presented in compliance with the conditions laid down in these provisions will or will not be accepted.

Referring to paragraphs 33 and 72 of its General Survey 1979 of on the abolition of forced labour, the Committee wishes to point out once again that career members of the armed forces, who have voluntarily engaged in the armed forces, should not be deprived of the right to leave the service in peacetime within a reasonable period, either at specified intervals, or with previous notice. Having noted that the Government’s report contains no new information on the subject, the Committee again requests the Government to indicated clearly the criteria applied in accepting or rejecting a resignation presented in conformity with sections 104 and 105 of the abovementioned Law, as well as the number of cases in which such resignations were refused and the grounds for refusal.

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

The Committee has noted the information provided by the Government in reply to its earlier comments.

1. Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Domestic workers and similar categories. In its earlier comments, the Committee expressed concern about the conditions under which domestic servants can freely leave their employment  and their possibility to have recourse to courts if necessary.

The Committee previously noted that the Labour Code currently in force excludes domestic workers but that, according to the Government, the new draft Labour Code would cover this category of workers and, pursuant to section 5 of the draft Labour Code, the competent minister would make an order specifying the rules governing the relationship between domestic servants and their employers. Having noted the Government’s indication in its 2003 report that the new Labour Code has not yet been adopted and that no ministerial order on the subject has been issued, the Committee expresses the firm hope that the new Labour Code will provide adequate protection for these workers as regards their freedom to terminate employment, and that the Government will communicate a copy of the new Code, as soon as it is adopted, as well as any ministerial order or any other legislative text specifying the rules governing the relationship between domestic servants and their employers.

Pending the adoption of these provisions, the Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on any judicial procedures relating to the freedom of domestic workers to terminate employment.

2. Article 25. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that the legislation does not contain any specific provision under which the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour is punishable as a penal offence, and invited the Government to take the necessary measures, for example, by introducing a new provision to that effect in the legislation. The Committee has noted that the Government referred in its reports to various penal provisions (such as sections 49 and 57 of Act No. 31 of 1970 on the amendment of the Penal Code, or section 121 of the Penal Code) prohibiting public officials or employees from forcing a worker to perform a job for the State or for any public body, as well as to section 173 of the Penal Code, which provides for the imposition of penalties on anyone who threatens another person physically or with damage to his reputation or property with a view to forcing the victim to do something or to refrain from doing something.

While noting these indications, the Committee wishes to point out once again that the abovementioned provisions do not appear to be sufficient to give effect to this Article of the Convention which stipulates that "the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour shall be punishable as a penal offence", and that "it shall be an obligation on any Member ratifying this Convention to ensure that the penalties imposed by law are really adequate and strictly enforced".

The Committee hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures (e.g. through the adoption of the new Labour Code) in order to give full effect to this Article of the Convention. Pending the adoption of such measures, it asks the Government to provide information on the application of these penal provisions in practice, supplying copies of the court decisions and indicating the penalties imposed.

3. Measures to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons for the purpose of exploitation. The Committee previously noted the Government’s statement in its reply to the Committee’s 2000 general observation on the subject that the victims of forced labour have the right to refer to the authorities, though without being allowed to stay in the country during the civil action unless their legal residence allows them to do so. The Committee asked the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to allow the victims of forced labour to stay in the country at least for the duration of court proceedings.

Having noted from the Government’s report that no such measures have been taken, the Committee asks the Government to indicate any other measures taken or contemplated to encourage the victims to turn to the authorities, such as, for example, protection of victims willing to testify from reprisals by the exploiters. Please indicate whether there is an intention to introduce penal provisions aiming specifically at the punishment of trafficking in persons for the purpose of exploitation.

The Committee is also addressing a request directly to the Government on certain other points.

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

Also referring to its observation, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the following point:

Resignation for career military personnel. In its previous comments, the Committee had observed that the Government had not indicated what criteria would apply to the acceptance or rejection of a resignation presented in conformity with Law No. 32 of 1967 (sections 104 and 105). The Committee had stressed that career military personnel who have voluntarily engaged in the armed forces should have the right to leave the service in peacetime within a reasonable period, either at specified intervals or with previous notice (see General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour, paragraphs 33 and 72). Having received no information in this connection, the Committee repeats its previous request on this point.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s reports. In its previous comments, it noted that a draft Labour Code was being prepared and that a copy thereof would be provided by the Government as soon as adopted by the competent authority. The Committee would appreciate receiving information in this connection.

1. Article 2(1) of the Convention. Domestic workers and similar categories. The Committee refers to its earlier comments concerning the conditions under which domestic servants can leave their employment (in particular their freedom to terminate employment) and their possibility to have recourse to courts if necessary.

The Committee noted that the contract concluded between the employer and the domestic servant is subject to the provisions of civil law and that conflicts are settled by civil courts. It notes from the Government’s 2000 report the information concerning the establishment of an independent administration at the Ministry of Interior to which is entrusted the supervision of domestic service agencies. The latter are required to pay a deposit worth 5,000 Kuwaiti dinars at one of the local banks in the Ministry’s account for the repatriation of a domestic worker in specific cases instead of him/her assuming the travel costs.

The Committee had previously asked the Government to indicate whether it was possible to derogate from the model contract attached to Ordinance No. 617 of 1992 on domestic service agencies. In its reply, the Government indicates that nothing prevents either party from amending the terms of the contract if there were more advantageous terms for the domestic worker. The Committee again asks the Government to supply sample copies of such contracts.

The Committee had also asked the Government to indicate whether the procedures before the civil courts were ordinary procedures or if there existed simplified procedures and to give examples of cases brought to the civil courts. It notes the Government’s indication in its 2000 report that, in the private sector, it is better to resort to civil courts rather than to apply the Labour Code provisions as the former are competent in examining conflicts relating to the rights of domestic workers. The Government also indicates that the Ministry of Justice has provided a sufficient number of officers who are responsible for drafting proceedings to be instituted by plaintiffs, at no cost. The Committee again asks the Government to give examples of cases brought to the civil courts.

The Committee noted in its previous comments that the Labour Code currently in force excludes domestic workers and that, pursuant to section 5 of the draft Labour Code, the competent Minister would make an order specifying the rules governing the relationship between domestic servants and employees regarded as such by their employers. It had asked the Government to provide any ministerial order or any other legislative text to specify the rules governing the relationship between domestic workers and their employers. Having received no information in this connection, the Committee repeats its previous request on this point.

2. Article 25. The Committee had noted that the legislation does not contain any specific provision under which the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour is punishable as a penal offence, and invited the Government to take the necessary measures, for example by introducing a new provision to that effect in the legislation, and to provide information on any measures taken. The Committee notes that, in its latest report, the Government refers to section 49 of Law No. 31 of 1970 amending a few provisions of the Penal Code. The Committee also notes that, according to the Government’s report, the abovementioned section provides that "any public official, employee, or worker employing by force workers in work for the State or for any public body, or retains part or the whole of their wages without justification shall be punishable by imprisonment for a period not exceeding three years, and to a maximum fine of 225 dinars or by either of these two penalties". The Committee asks the Government to provide a copy of the abovementioned Law and to indicate whether similar provisions exist in the private sector. In case such provisions do not exist, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken to introduce a new provision to that effect in its legislation.

3. Reply to the general observation of 2000. The Committee notes that in reply to its general observation made in 2000 respecting the measures taken or contemplated to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons for the purpose of exploitation, the Government refers to the provisions of the Labour Code and the Penal Code that prohibit and punish the use of forced or compulsory labour. It also notes the Government’s statement that the victims of forced labour have the right to refer to the authorities, though without them being allowed to stay in the country during the civil action unless their legal residence allows them to do so. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures it intends to take, if any, to allow the victims of forced labour to stay in the country at least for the duration of court proceedings.

The Committee also addresses a direct request to the Government on another point.

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

The Committee notes from the Government's report that a tripartite committee has been established and that it reviewed the draft Labour Code and introduced amendments to take into account the comments of the Committee of Experts and further promulgated ministerial orders to make the legislation compatible with the provisions of Conventions.

1. Article 2(1) of the Convention. Domestic workers and similar categories. The Committee had already noted the measures taken in order to protect these workers in the course of their recruitment by the domestic service agencies. The Committee notes from the Government's report that the contract concluded between the employer and the domestic servant is subject to the provisions of civil law and that conflicts are settled by civil courts.

The Committee asks the Government to indicate in its next report whether it is possible to derogate from the model contract, and to provide examples of such contracts. It also asks the Government to indicate whether the procedures before the civil courts are ordinary procedures or if there exist simplified procedures and to give examples of cases brought to the civil courts.

The Committee further notes that the Labour Code currently in force excludes domestic workers and that, pursuant to section 5 of the draft Labour Code, the competent minister will make an order specifying the rules governing the relationship between domestic servants and employees regarded as such by their employers.

The Committee takes due note of the statement in the report that a copy of the Labour Code will be provided as soon as it is adopted by the competent authority. It would also ask the Government to provide any ministerial order or any other legislative text to specify the rules governing the relationship between domestic workers and their employers.

2. Article 25. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the explanations in the report. The Committee observes that the Constitution prohibits forced labour (article 42), and an employer is prohibited from forcing a worker to do any work or task not provided for in the contract (Ministerial Order No. 105 of 1994). The Penal Code provides for penalties in case of threats to a person with a view to forcing that person to do something, although the legislation does not contain any specific provision under which the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour is punishable as a penal offence. It therefore invites the Government to take the necessary measures, for example by introducing a new provision to that effect in its legislation, and to provide information on any measures taken.

3. Resignation for career military personnel. While noting the information provided in the report, the Committee observes that the Government has not indicated what criteria would apply to the acceptance or rejection of a resignation presented in conformity with Law No. 32 of 1967 (sections 104 and 105). The Committee again recalls that career military personnel who have voluntarily engaged in the armed forces should have the right to leave the service in peacetime within a reasonable period, either at specified intervals or with previous notice (General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour, paragraphs 33 and 72). The Committee would again ask the Government to indicate what criteria would be applied to the rejection of a resignation presented in conformity with the law.

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

The Committee has noted the information provided by the Government in reply to its earlier comments. It has noted with interest the establishment, by Ministerial Order No. 114 of 1996, of a committee to study labour standards and Conventions, which shall, inter alia, study and propose labour standards in the light of international labour Conventions and Recommendations adopted by the International Labour Conference.

1. Article 25 of the Convention. In its earlier comments the Committee noted the Government's statement that there does not exist any form of forced or compulsory labour in the country. It noted that the Constitution prohibits forced labour (article 42), that the labour legislation is based on the principle of the agreement of the parties and that Law No. 38 of 1964 respecting employment in the private sector does not deal with forced labour.

The Committee has noted the adoption of Ministerial Order No. 105 of 1994, which prohibits private sector employers from utilizing any method to force employees to work or undertake tasks which fall outside their contract duties (section 1, clause 1). The Government refers in its latest report received in November 1996 to section 49 of Act No. 31 of 1970 to amend certain provisions of Act No. 16 of 1960, which prohibits public officials or employees to force a worker to perform a job for the State or for a public body and provides for punishment of imprisonment or a fine in case of violation of that prohibition. The Committee has also noted the Government's indication in its latest report that section 173 of the Penal Code provides for the imposition of penalties on anyone who threatens another person physically or with damage to his reputation or property with a view to forcing the victim to do something or to refrain from doing something.

While noting these indications, the Committee wishes to point out once again that the above-mentioned provisions do not appear to be sufficient to give effect to this Article of the Convention which stipulates that "the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour shall be punishable as a penal offence", and that "it shall be an obligation on any Member ratifying this Convention to ensure that the penalties imposed by law are really adequate and strictly enforced".

The Committee hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures (e.g. through the committee to study labour standards and Conventions referred to above) in order to give full effect to this Article of the Convention. It asks the Government to provide, in its next report, information on any progress made in this regard.

2. In its earlier comments the Committee noted Ordinance No. 617 of 1992 on domestic service agencies and the model contract attached to the Ordinance. It noted that domestic workers and similar categories are excluded from the scope of Law No. 38 of 1964 respecting employment in the private sector. The Committee requested the Government to indicate how persons in domestic service are protected and in particular under what conditions they can leave their employment and to what courts they may have recourse if necessary.

The Committee has noted the Government's indications in its report of 1993 concerning the protection of domestic workers in the course of their recruitment by the domestic service agencies. It has noted that, in accordance with Legislative Decree No. 40 of 1992, such agencies must be licensed by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and a special inspectorate shall be set up to supervise their operations. The Government has also indicated that the new draft Labour Code covers this category of workers.

However, in the absence of the indications concerning the conditions under which domestic servants can leave their employment and concerning their possibilities to have recourse to courts if necessary, the Committee reiterates its request to the Government for such information. It hopes that the new Labour Code will provide adequate protection for these workers as regards their freedom to terminate employment, and asks the Government to supply a copy of the new Code as soon as it is adopted.

3. In its earlier comments the Committee asked the Government to supply details regarding the criteria applied in accepting or rejecting a resignation submitted by a person wishing to resign from the army in accordance with the requirements laid down by Law No. 32 of 1967 (sections 98, 99, 104 and 105). The Committee noted that it is the obligation of the person seeking to resign to continue service in the armed forces until the resignation is accepted, which means that the service is not automatically terminated upon delivery of a resignation which otherwise complies with the requirements of sections 104 and 105. It noted that neither section 104 nor 105 establishes the criterion used for deciding whether a resignation presented in compliance with the conditions laid down in these provisions will or will not be accepted.

With reference to paragraphs 33 and 72 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, the Committee wishes to point out once again that career members of the armed forces, who have voluntarily engaged in the armed forces, should not be deprived of the right to leave the service in peacetime within a reasonable period, either at specified intervals, or with previous notice. While noting the Government's statement in its 1993 report that it is possible for all members of the armed forces to resign from the army, subject to some limited exceptional cases, the Committee again requests the Government to indicate clearly the criteria applied in accepting or rejecting a resignation presented in conformity with sections 104 and 105 of the above-mentioned law, as well as the number of cases in which such resignations were refused.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

The Committee notes the Government's reports.

1. It notes the Government's statement that there does not exist any form of forced or compulsory labour in the country.

It notes that, according to the Government, the Constitution prohibits forced labour, that the labour legislation is based on the principle of the agreement of the parties and that Law No. 38 of 1964 respecting employment in the private sector does not deal with forced labour.

The Committee wishes to point out in this respect that the Convention explicitly requires that the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour shall be punishable as a penal offence. An overall prohibition which makes forced labour illegal, or unconstitutional, does not appear to be sufficient to satisfy the requirements of Article 25 of the Convention.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures that it envisages taking to give full effect to this provision.

The Committee notes Ordinance No. 617 of 1992 on domestic service agencies, and in particular the clauses of the model contract. It notes that domestic workers and similar categories are excluded from the scope of Law No. 38 respecting employment in the private sector.

The Committee considers that, in certain cases, even when there is a general prohibition of forced or compulsory labour, employers may find themselves in a situation in which they exercise excessive control over workers, and in particular over foreign workers, especially those which are not covered by the labour legislation, such as domestic workers.

In so far as this category of persons may be indirectly obliged to work under conditions which are not comparable with a free employment relationship, the Committee requests the Government to indicate how persons in domestic service are protected.

With reference to Ordinance No. 617, referred to above, it also requests the Government to indicate the nature of the model contract attached to the Ordinance, the conditions under which persons in domestic service can leave their employment, and the courts to which they may have recourse if necessary.

2. Further to its direct request of 1990, the Committee recalls that it made comments on the conditions under which officers may resign from the army. The Committee considered that neither statutory provisions nor administrative practice may be invoked to deprive career members of the armed forces, who have voluntarily engaged in the armed forces, from the right to leave the service in peacetime, either at specified intervals, or with previous notice, subject to conditions which may normally be required to ensure continuity of service.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on developments in the situation in this respect.

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

In several previous direct requests, the Committee asked the Government to supply details regarding the criteria applied in accepting or rejecting a resignation submitted by a person wishing to resign from the army in accordance with the requirements under Law No. 32 of 1967. Sections 98 and 99 of the Law provide that the service of an officer (or an under-officer or a simple soldier) is terminated, inter alia, if the resignation is accepted. Section 104 stipulates that to be valid a resignation must be in writing and without condition. Section 104 further indicates that the service of the person resigning is terminated only by the decision to accept the resignation and that a resignation from the army may not be presented during wartime, a period of martial law or force majeure. Section 105 provides the same while the person seeking resignation is being investigated or prosecuted before a military tribunal until a definitive sentence is pronounced by the tribunal. It is the obligation of the person seeking to resign to continue service in the armed forces until the resignation is accepted, that is the service is not automatically terminated upon delivery of a resignation which otherwise complies with the requirements of sections 104 and 105. Neither section 104 nor 105 establishes the criterion used for deciding whether a resignation presented in compliance with the conditions laid down in these provisions will or will not be accepted.

The Government indicates in its most recent report that the armed forces are divided into two categories: one composed of persons serving compulsory military service to which the provisions of the Convention do not apply, the other composed of volunteers who are admitted into the army. As regards the second category, the Government indicates that persons volunteer for service of their own free will and that the army obliges no one to volunteer for service; on the contrary, from those persons who volunteer the army chooses, according to its established standards, those who are inducted. Accordingly, inductees are fully aware of legislative provisions governing their service. Thus, in the Government's opinion, as a practical matter forced labour is all the more likely not to exist.

As concerns the question of resignation and the absence in law of criteria which would permit a request for resignation to be considered accepted at the expiration of a fixed period of time, the Government makes the following points. First, the absence in Kuwaiti law of a fixed time period at the end of which a resignation is considered accepted or refused is not unique to this country's armed forces; for the most part, in the Government's opinion, armed forces throughout the world apply this system, consistent with rules of military control, dependence, discipline and precision. Second, section 104 stipulates that a resignation must be made in writing and without condition; these requirements are imposed so that a resignation is presented only after due reflection and as a result of free choice, in conformity with section 98, paragraph 4 and section 99, paragraph 4 of Law No. 32 of 1967. The resignation will be refused for the reasons given in section 105 as well as in cases provided for under Article 2, paragraph 2 of the Convention. Third, the Government indicates that in practice all requests for resignation which conform to the formalities fixed in law are accepted and only those which fall within the exceptions established by law or "greater national interest" are refused.

The Committee takes due note of the Government's indications. The Committee also notes that, although requested, no specific details regarding the number of cases in which resignations from the armed forces were not accepted otherwise than during time of war or pending the person's legal prosecution have been provided, that is, statistical data with respect to the number of resignations conforming to formal requirements received, the number granted and the number refused, including the reasons for refusal. The Committee must reiterate that while the right of an individual to terminate employment may be limited by a government during periods of emergency within the meaning of Article 2, paragraph 2(d), of the Convention, in other circumstances, the effect of statutory provisions preventing termination of employment by giving notice of reasonable length is to turn a contractual relationship based on the will of the parties into service by compulsion of law, and is thus incompatible with the Convention. While this principle does not apply to provisions relating to compulsory military service, they do apply to career military service; and neither statutory provisions nor administrative practice may be invoked to deprive persons who have voluntarily entered into an engagement of the right to leave the service in peacetime within a reasonable period, either at specified intervals, or with previous notice, subject to the conditions which may normally be required to ensure the continuity of the service. Accordingly, the Committee again requests the Government to indicate the details and number of cases in which resignations presented in conformity with sections 104 and 105 of Law No. 32 of 1967 were turned down. Additionally, the Committee asks the Government to provide information concerning the interpretation given in practice to "greater national interest" as a reason for refusing a resignation request.

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