Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2013, Publicación: 103ª reunión CIT (2014)

Convenio sobre la abolición del trabajo forzoso, 1957 (núm. 105) - Emiratos Árabes Unidos (Ratificación : 1997)

Otros comentarios sobre C105

Observación

Solicitud directa

Visualizar en: Francés - Español - ArabicVisualizar todo

Article 1(c) of the Convention. Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that under the Federal Law on Merchant Shipping (No. 26 of 1981), penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour) may be imposed on seafarers for various breaches of labour discipline, such as violations of service-related orders, neglecting to serve on vessels or to mount guard, being absent from a vessel without authorization, or any other act that may disrupt order or the service on board (section 200(a)(c)(g) and (j)), refusal to comply with an order concerning work on board the vessel, repeated acts of disobedience (section 204(d) and (e)), or the performance of any acts mentioned in section 204 by more than three persons in agreement (section 205).

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that according to section 200 of Federal Law No. 26 of 1981 on Merchant Shipping, any member of the vessel’s crew who commits any of the offences mentioned in this section shall be sentenced to detention and not imprisonment for a period varying from one day to thirty days or a fine which amounts to one day’s pay, or that of 30 days, or to both. This category of prisoners who are sentenced to detention may not work unless it is upon their request. The Committee takes due note of this information.

Regarding the penalty of imprisonment specified in sections 204 and 205, the Committee notes the Government’s explanation that such penalties are imposed on seafarers who commit any of the violations specified in the abovementioned sections, which are few acts exceeding the level of contravention which do not endanger the vessel or the life of persons.

The Committee points out that section 204(d) and (e) (refusal to comply with an order concerning work on board the vessel, repeated acts of disobedience), as well as section 205 (the performance of any acts mentioned in section 204 by more than three persons in agreement), are worded in terms broad enough to lend themselves to application as a means of punishment for labour discipline, and in so far as they are enforceable with sanctions of imprisonment involving compulsory labour, they are incompatible with the Convention.

Therefore, the Committee once again reiterates its hope that the necessary measures will be taken to bring the abovementioned provisions into conformity with the Convention by limiting their scope to circumstances in which the ship or the life or health of persons are endangered.

Article 1(d). Sanctions involving compulsory labour for having participated in strikes. In its earlier comments, the Committee had referred to section 231(1) of the Penal Code which provides for sanctions of imprisonment (involving an obligation to work) in cases in which at least three public officials abandon their jobs or voluntarily abstain from performing any obligations related thereto, acting in agreement among themselves or pursuing an illegal objective.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that pursuant to section 231(2) of the Penal Code, the penalty of imprisonment applies only if the strike is likely to endanger the life, health, or safety of people or is likely to cause disturbance or dissension among the people or if it harms the public interest. The Government also adds that no sentence of imprisonment is imposed on any person who has participated peacefully in a strike. The penalty imposed is that for a misdemeanour, and only applied if the strike endangers the life, health, or safety of the people or causes disturbance among citizens.

However, the Committee notes that section 231(1) of the Penal Code is worded in such manner that it provides for sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year in cases in which at least three public officials abandon their jobs or voluntarily abstain from performing any obligations related thereto, acting in agreement among themselves or pursuing an illegal objective. Such a provision is not in conformity with the Convention, since it makes any strikes in the public service illegal and punishable with imprisonment (which involves compulsory labour).

The Committee therefore recalls, once again, that no one who has participated in a strike should be subject to penal sanctions for the mere fact of peacefully participating in a strike and in no event should be subject to a prison sentence involving compulsory labour.

In the light of the above considerations, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that section 231(1) of the Penal Code is reviewed or abrogated, so that no sanctions involving compulsory labour can be imposed for the mere fact of organizing or peacefully participating in strikes. The Committee also requests the Government to provide in its next report further information on the application of section 231(1) of the Penal Code in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.