ILO-en-strap
NORMLEX
Information System on International Labour Standards
NORMLEX Page d'accueil > Profils par pays >  > Commentaires

Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 1999, publiée 88ème session CIT (2000)

Convention (n° 108) sur les pièces d'identité des gens de mer, 1958 - Maurice (Ratification: 1969)

Autre commentaire sur C108

Demande directe
  1. 2001
  2. 1999

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

The Committee notes the information in the Government's report and, in particular, the Continuous Certificate of Discharge sent as the specimen identity document issued pursuant to the Convention. It notes, however, that according to the Notice to Seaman on page 2 of the document, the certificate is given into the safe keeping of the master and that "if the seaman has wilfully or through misconduct failed to join his ship, the Authorities may withhold the book for such period as they think fit".

The Committee draws the Government's attention to the provisions of Article 2(1) of the Convention that the identity document is an entitlement for nationals who are seafarers, as well as the requirement under Article 3 of the Convention that the identity document shall remain in the seafarer's possession at all times. Therefore, the seafarer cannot be required to surrender the document to the master for safe keeping, nor can it be retained by the authorities as a disciplinary measure.

In addition, there is no statement in the identity document, as required under Article 4(2) of the Convention, that it is issued for the purpose of the Seafarers' Identity Documents Convention, 1958 (No. 108), of the International Labour Organization.

The Committee further notes that the identity document is governed by The Passports Act, 1968, and with regard to article 7(1) and (2), the document shall be in such form as may be approved by the Minister. However, Article 4(6) of the Convention requires that the precise form and content of the document shall be decided by the Member after consultation with the shipowners' and seafarers' organizations concerned. The Committee recalls that the identity document is not a passport and draws the Government's attention to the distinction between passports and identity documents in its comments on the application of this Convention in its last report (International Labour Conference, 87th Session, 1999, Report III (Part 1A), pages 21-23). The Committee requests the Government to inform it of steps taken to: (i) cancel the provisions requiring surrender of the identity document for safe keeping by the master; (ii) cancel the provisions allowing the authorities to retain the identity document as a disciplinary measure; and (iii) include the statement that the identity document is issued pursuant to this Convention. In addition, it requests the Government to provide particulars of the required consultations, if any, concerning the form and content of the Continuous Certificate of Disharge, sent as the identity document for the purpose of this Convention.

The Committee also requests the Government to indicate whether the identity document is issued to foreigners. If this is the case, the Government is requested to provide a copy of the legislative text ensuring the right of return set forth in Article 5 of the Convention.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 2001]

© Copyright and permissions 1996-2024 International Labour Organization (ILO) | Privacy policy | Disclaimer