Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2017, Publicación: 107ª reunión CIT (2018)

Convenio sobre la abolición del trabajo forzoso, 1957 (núm. 105) - Serbia (Ratificación : 2003)

Otros comentarios sobre C105

Observación

2020

Solicitud directa

Visualizar en: Francés - EspañolVisualizar todo

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Penal sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. Public Assembly Act. The Committee previously noted that, section 15 of the Public Assembly Act provides for penalties of imprisonment for a maximum of 60 days on organizers of a public assembly who have not taken the measures to maintain order in the assembly, who have not submitted an application to the Ministry of Interior at least 48 hours prior to the scheduled beginning of the assembly, or who hold an assembly regardless of a ban issued under the Act. Referring to paragraph 302 of its 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, the Committee recalled that freedom of expression of political views cannot be fully enjoyed unless there is a guarantee of the right of association and of assembly through which citizens seek to secure the dissemination and acceptance of their views. Therefore, provisions requiring the granting of prior authorization for meetings and assemblies at the discretion of the authorities, where violations can be punished by sanctions of imprisonment involving compulsory labour, are not compatible with the Convention.

The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication in its report that, in January 2016, the National Assembly passed the Law on Public Gatherings, which only provides for fines and not for penalties of imprisonment in the section on applicable penal sanctions. The Committee requests the Government to provide a copy of the Law on Public Gatherings passed in 2016.

Article 1(a) and (d). Penal sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, and for participating in strikes. Criminal Code. The Committee previously noted that penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour) may be imposed for the offence of causing panic or serious disruption of public peace and order, including acts committed through the media or at public gatherings (pursuant to section 343 of the Criminal Code) and for instigating national, racial and religious hatred and intolerance (section 317 of the Code). The Committee observed that these provisions of the Criminal Code provide for penal sanctions (involving compulsory labour) in circumstances defined in terms which are broad enough to give rise to questions about their application in practice. The Committee also noted that, pursuant to section 167 of the Criminal Code, persons organizing or leading an unlawful strike shall be punished with imprisonment of up to three years, if the strike endangers, inter alia, “property of considerable extent” or if grave consequences result therefrom. It therefore recalled that Article 1(a) and (d) of the Convention prohibits the imposition of a prison sentence, involving compulsory labour, as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or for peacefully participating in a strike.

The Committee notes the Government’s information in its report that, in accordance with the constitutional principle of the prohibition of forced labour, the Criminal Code does not provide for a sanction of forced labour. The Government emphasizes that the work of the convict is voluntary. The Committee also notes that, the Rulebook on work of a convicted person (No. 145/2014) was adopted in 2014, pursuant to section 100 of the Law on Execution of Criminal Sanctions that provides for a more detailed regulation on the labour rights of a convict. Furthermore, section 8 of the Rulebook stipulates that the expert team shall propose to the manager of the institution the work engagement of convicted persons based on defined risk level, mental physical and health ability, professional qualification, expressed wishes of the convicted persons and the capacities of the institution. However, the Committee notes that, according to section 11 of the Rulebook, a convicted person may perform not more than two hours of work in addition to his or her working time per day for the maintenance of hygiene and other current work in the institution. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate whether the work performed under section 11 of the Rulebook is voluntary, and whether the refusal to perform such work is free from any penalty. The Committee also requests the Government to provide copies of written consent or requests to perform work of convicted persons under sections 167, 317 and 343 of the Criminal Code.