Observación (CEACR) - Adopción: 1995, Publicación: 83ª reunión CIT (1996)

The Committee notes the Government's reports, and comments made by the Mauritius Employers' Federation.

1. Article 1(c) and (d) of the Convention. In its previous comments the Committee noted that under section 183(1)(a), (b), (c) and (e), read together with section 184(1) of the Merchant Shipping Act, No. 28 of 1986 (which came into operation on 15 January 1991 by virtue of Proclamation No. 1 of 1991), certain breaches of discipline by seamen (such as desertion, neglect or refusal to join the ship, absence without leave, neglect of duty) are punishable by imprisonment (involving an obligation to perform labour), and that under section 183(1), (3) and (4) seamen who are not citizens of Mauritius, and who commit such offences, may be conveyed on board ship for the purpose of proceeding to sea. Referring to paragraphs 110 to 125 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced or compulsory labour, the Committee recalled that the Convention does not protect seamen responsible for breaches of labour discipline endangering the safety of the ship or the life or health of persons on board. However the scope of the above-mentioned provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act is not limited to such cases.

The Committee notes with interest the Government's indication in its latest report that necessary legislative measures will be taken to amend sections 183 and 184 of the Merchant Shipping Act in order to comply with Article 1(c) of the Convention. The Committee looks forward to this.

2. Article 1(d). In comments made for many years, the Committee has referred to sections 82 and 83 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1973, which empower the minister to refer any industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration, enforceable by penalties involving compulsory labour. The Committee has pointed out that these provisions are incompatible with Article 1(d) of the Convention.

In its latest report, the Government indicates that the Trade Unions and Labour Relations Bill, which is intended to replace the Industrial Relations Act, contains in Clause 99 a provision excluding forced or compulsory labour from penalties for participation in strikes. Following the introduction of the Bill in the National Assembly, the Government started consultations with employers' and workers' organizations so as to reach consensus on the provision of the Bill. Consultations are not yet completed. At the opening of the 2nd session of the First National Assembly on 7 April 1995, the Government undertook to review the legal provisions on industrial relations.

The Committee takes due note of these indications. It notes that under section 99, subsection (3) of the Bill, any person who commits the offence of calling, instituting, organizing, carrying on or participating in an unlawful strike shall, on conviction, be liable to imprisonment, and that subsection (4) specifies that for the purposes of subsection (3), "imprisonment" means imprisonment without hard labour. This provision in subsection (4), if adopted, would not, however, remove section 99 of the Bill from the scope of Article 1(d) of the Convention. The Committee notes that, under sections 30(3) and 31 of the Prisons Ordinance, special provisions shall be made in the prison regulations concerning the employment of prisoners sentenced to imprisonment without hard labour. Such prisoners are divided into two divisions; the first including persons who have failed to satisfy a judgment debt, who have shown contempt of court, or have been sentenced to imprisonment for non-payment of a fine, the second including all other prisoners. Prisoners of the second division "shall be kept steadily employed and not allowed to idle their time away" (section 42 of the Prison Regulations). Prisoners of the first division and prisoners sentenced to imprisonment for non-payment of a fine "shall be employed within the prison at some light work such as cleaning the prison, picking coir or oakum or breaking small macadam" (section 43 of the Regulations). Labour shall be optional for prisoners detained pending inquiry or committed for trial (section 27 of the Prisons Ordinance). It would thus appear that except for prisoners in such detention (section 27 above), all prisoners are obliged to perform prison labour.

The Committee refers to the explanations provided in paragraphs 106 to 109 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, where it pointed out that the scope of the Convention is not restricted to hard labour and other particularly arduous or oppressive forms of labour, as distinct from ordinary prison labour. The Convention prohibits the use of "any form" of forced or compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, insofar as it is exacted in one of the five cases specified by the Convention.

The Committee therefore hopes that in the Trade Unions and Labour Relations Bill, either the penalty of imprisonment will be removed from section 99, or the freedom of workers to strike following normal procedures will be restored and any provisions for compulsory arbitration will be limited to industrial disputes in services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population and/or, within the public service, be limited in scope to public servants exercising authority in the name of the State.

The Committee hopes that the Government will initiate the necessary action and that it will soon report on the measures taken.