Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2011, Publicación: 101ª reunión CIT (2012)

Convenio sobre la abolición del trabajo forzoso, 1957 (núm. 105) - Camboya (Ratificación : 1999)

Otros comentarios sobre C105

Observación

Solicitud directa

Visualizar en: Francés - EspañolVisualizar todo

Communication of texts. The Committee notes the copies of the New Penal Code, the Law on Demonstrations, and the Circular No. 005 (2000) and Notification No. 20 (2000) on the right to strike supplied by the Government with its report. It requests the Government once again to provide, with its next report, copies of the provisions governing prison labour and the law governing labour relations in maritime transport, to which reference is made in section 1(d) of the Labour Law, 1997, including any disciplinary provisions applicable to seafarers.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for the expression of views opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee previously noted that section 61 of the Provisions relating to the Judiciary and Criminal Law and Procedure applicable in Cambodia during the transitional period, 1992, provides for sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year (which involves compulsory prison labour) for the incitement of national, racial or religious hatred by means of speech or meetings in a public place, or by writings, publications, paintings, films or any other means of audiovisual communication (“incitement to discrimination”). It also noted the provisions of section 41 of the Law on political parties, of 28 October 1997, which make punishable with sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year (involving compulsory prison labour) various offences related to the administration or management of a political party which has been dissolved, or whose activities have been suspended by a court, or whose registration has been refused.

The Committee recalled that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It referred in this connection to paragraph 154 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour, where it observed that the Convention does not prohibit punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence, incite to violence or engage in preparatory acts aimed at violence; but sanctions involving compulsory labour fall within the scope of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the expression of views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system. Similar problems of the application of the Convention may arise from restrictions affecting the creation or functioning of associations, where administrative authorities enjoy wide discretionary powers to suspend associations or to prevent their creation, if such restrictions are enforceable with penalties involving compulsory labour.

The Committee requests the Government once again to provide, in its next report, information on the application of the abovementioned provisions in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their scope, so as to enable the Committee to ascertain whether they are applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

The Committee previously noted that section 12 of the Press Law of 18 July 1995, contains a prohibition to publish or reproduce information that affects national security or political stability, violation of this prohibition being punishable with fines, but also with sanctions under criminal law. Noting that the Government’s report contains no information on this issue and referring to the explanations in point 1 of this direct request, the Committee hopes the Government will not fail to provide, in its next report, information on the application in practice of section 12 of the Press Law (1995), clarifying the kind of criminal sanctions applicable in case of violation of this section. Please provide copies of any relevant texts, as well as copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating the scope of the above provision, indicating the criminal penalties imposed.

The Committee notes the Law on Demonstrations provided by the Government in its report. It notes, in particular, that section 1 of the above Law prohibits public meetings and demonstrations which can be detrimental to public tranquillity, order or security. Under section 4, authorities “can take measures to stop” any demonstration which takes place without local authorities authorization. The Committee requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the application in practice of the Law on Demonstrations, indicating, in particular, whether sanctions of imprisonment may be applied in case of violation of its provisions. Please provide copies of any relevant texts, as well as copies of any court decisions passed under the above Law, indicating the penalties imposed.

The Committee notes the adoption of the new Penal Code, in effect since December 2010. Pending a translation of the new text, the Committee notes the report of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia, presented at the 18th Session of the UN Human Rights Council on 2 August 2011 (document No. A/HRC/18/46), in which the Special Rapporteur expresses concern about provisions in many laws in Cambodia, including the new Penal Code, that go beyond international standards in curtailing people’s freedoms, as do the courts’ application and interpretation of such laws. The Committee also notes that, in the report, the Special Rapporteur refers to a worrying trend of restrictions on freedom of expression in the form of criminal defamation, disinformation and incitement suits that had resulted in prison terms for individuals, including journalists, NGO workers and parliamentarians, who had no intention of affecting national security. In this connection, the Special Rapporteur refers, in particular, to convictions for disinformation and defamation under section 305 of the new Penal Code, and for incitement under section 495 of the same Law, in which sentences of imprisonment (involving an obligation to work) have been imposed.

Corroborating the communications of the UN Special Rapporteur, the Committee notes the report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review, presented at the 13th Session of the UN Human Rights Council on 4 January 2010 (document No. A/HRC/13/4), in which the Working Group recommended that Cambodia review its newly adopted penal code with a view to ensuring its compliance with the permissible limitations to freedom of expression and define the scope of defamation and disinformation charges to ensure that these do not impinge on freedom of expression, giving clear guidance to judicial officials so that these provisions do not result in a large number of cases where the charges are disproportionate (paragraph 46). The Committee hopes that the Government will provide, in its next report, information on the measures taken or contemplated with a view to giving effect to the above recommendations, in particular as regards the revision of the provisions restricting freedom of expression, as well as information on any other measures taken or envisaged to ensure compliance with the Convention on this point.

Article 1(c). Sanctions applicable to public servants. The Committee previously noted that section 35 of the Law on the common statute of civil servants, of 26 October 1994, strictly prohibits civil servants from committing certain acts, such as, e.g. undertaking work for personal purposes during the hours of service, publishing facts related to their position without prior authorization of the Minister, or exercising a profession forbidden by the particular statute of their body, this prohibition being enforceable with disciplinary sanctions under section 40 of the same Law, without prejudice to possible penal proceedings. While noting that the Government’s report contains no information in this regard, the Committee requests the Government once again to clarify the scope of the penal liability referred to in section 35 and indicate applicable penal sanctions, supplying copies of relevant texts, in order to enable the Committee to assess their compliance with the Convention.