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

Convenio sobre el trabajo forzoso, 1930 (núm. 29) - Belarús (Ratificación : 1956)

Otros comentarios sobre C029

Observación

Solicitud directa

Visualizar en: Francés - EspañolVisualizar todo

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. 1. Trafficking in persons. The Committee previously noted with interest the efforts made by the Government to combat trafficking in persons, including through the adoption of Law No. 350-3 of 7 January 2012 on Combating Human Trafficking, the adoption of the National Policy and Action Plan on Trafficking and Illegal Migration 2011–13, the establishment of the National Rapporteur on Human Trafficking under the Ministry of the Interior, and the implementation of an international technical assistance project on combating human trafficking in Belarus carried out by the International Organization for Migration (IOM). Section 181 of the Criminal Code further prohibits trafficking for both labour and sexual exploitation and prescribes penalties ranging from three to 15 years’ imprisonment in addition to the forfeiture of offenders’ assets.

The Committee notes the Government’s information in its report that two cases were recorded under section 181 of the Criminal Code from 2015 to the first half of 2016. The Committee also notes the Government’s report to the Human Rights Committee (HRC) of the United Nations (UN) of 14 June 2017 that, in addition to the case recorded under section 181, 98 cases were recorded under crimes related to trafficking in persons in 2015, while the number in 2016 rose to 152. Moreover, 25 persons were prosecuted for trafficking and related crimes in 2015, while the number in 2016 was 38. The Government indicates that the majority of those cases were prosecuted under section 171 of the Criminal Code on organization and/or use of prostitution or the creation of conditions for prostitution (CCPR/C/BLR/5, paragraphs 183 and 187). The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the Amendment Act to the Law on Combating Human Trafficking had been adopted in 2014, which defines the basis for identification and rehabilitation of victims. Pursuant to the Amendment Act, the Council of Ministers adopted Regulation No. 484 in 2015, which established unified procedures of victim identification and protection (CCPR/C/BLR/5, paragraph 170). The Government indicates that, from 2002 to 2015, 5,222 victims of trafficking have been identified, of which 4,617 were subject to sexual exploitation and 602 were subject to labour exploitation (CCPR/C/BLR/5, paragraph 164). While taking due note of the efforts made by the Government to combat trafficking in persons, the Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on the application of sections 171 and 181 of the Criminal Code and Law No. 350-3 of 7 January 2012 on Combating Human Trafficking in practice, including on the number of investigations, prosecutions, convictions and specific penalties applied. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the implementation of the Amendment Act to the Law on Combating Human Trafficking and its implementing Regulation No. 485 in practice, including the number of victims identified and the type of assistance provided to them.

Article 2(2)(a). Non-military work of conscripts. The Committee noted that section 10 of Law No. 100-3 of 4 January 2010 on the status of military servicemen, provides that military servicemen can be requested to perform duties which are not specific to military service in cases stipulated by regulations. The Committee further noted that the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus, indicated in his 2014 and 2015 reports, that conscripts were still obliged to carry out unpaid work unrelated to their military service activities (A/HRC/26/44 and A/HRC/29/43). The Committee recalled that work or service exacted by virtue of compulsory military service laws is only excluded from the scope of the Convention on condition that it is of a purely military nature.

The Committee notes the absence of information in the Government’s report. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to take all the necessary measures in order to ensure, both in law and in practice, that any work or service exacted by virtue of compulsory military service laws are of a purely military measure, as required by the Convention. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the cases in which conscripts can be requested to perform duties which are not specific to military service, including the number of conscripts concerned and the types of measures carried out.

Article 2(2)(c). Prison labour. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that work of prisoners outside prison premises is allowed in accordance with the legislation in force, and that private companies are entitled to conclude contracts on the use of labour of prisoners with the administration of a correctional institution. The Committee also noted the provisions of the Criminal Enforcement Code, concerning the obligation of convicts to work at the enterprises determined by the administration of correctional institutions, including private enterprises, the refusal to work being punishable with sanctions. While noting that, under the national legislation in force, a convict’s conditions of work may be considered as approximating those of a free labour relationship, the Committee expressed the firm hope that measures would be taken to ensure that any work or service by convicted persons for private enterprises is performed only with the free, formal and informed consent of the persons concerned.

The Committee notes the absence of information in the Government’s report. The Committee once again recalls that, the exception provided for in Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention only refers to work exacted from convicted persons, provided that the said work is carried out under the supervision and control of a public authority and that the said person is not hired or placed at the disposal of private entities. However, the Committee indicates that work by prisoners for private entities can be held compatible with the Convention only where the necessary safeguards exist to ensure that the prisoners concerned accept such work voluntarily, by giving their free, formal and informed consent and without being subjected to pressure or the menace of any penalty, and that the conditions of such work approximate those of a free labour relationship (see General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, 2012, paragraph 291). The Committee once again expresses the firm hope that the Government will take the necessary measures, both in law and in practice, to ensure that work may only be performed by prisoners in private enterprises with their free, formal and informed consent, and that such consent is free from the menace of any penalty. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in this regard.