Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2006, publiée 96ème session CIT (2007)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the following matters raised in its previous direct request:

Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention. Work of prisoners for private employers. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 61 of the Execution of Punishments Act, which allows prisoners to work for trading companies, other legal entities and individual proprietorships, under the conditions provided for by the Minister of Justice. It recalled that, to be compatible with Article 2, paragraph 2(c), of the Convention, which expressly prohibits convicted prisoners from being hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations, such work should be carried out in conditions approximating a free employment relationship; this necessarily requires the formal consent of the persons concerned, as well as further guarantees and safeguards covering the essential elements of a free labour relationship, such as wages and social security, etc. (see paragraphs 119 and 128 to 143 of the Committee’s General Report to the 89th Session of the International Labour Conference, 2001).

The Committee has noted the Government’s repeated statement in its reports that performing labour is a right of prisoners, but it is not deemed obligatory. The Government refers in this connection to sections 24(1) and 64 of the Execution of Punishment Act, which stipulate that prisoners have the right to be given suitable work, which should be assigned by the prison administration in accordance with the existing possibilities and taking into account the prisoners’ age, sex, state of health, working capacity and their rehabilitation needs. The Government indicates that the work of prisoners both inside and outside prison premises is voluntary, and their work for private companies is only possible if they give their explicit consent in writing and if occupational safety and health requirements are ensured by the employer.

The Committee notes, however, that section 38(a) of the Execution of Punishment Act expressly provides for an obligation of prisoners to perform work assigned to them by the prison administration, and section 76 of the same Act imposes disciplinary sanctions for the non-performance of the obligation to work or other obligations by the prisoners. The Committee further notes that section 66(1) of the Execution of Punishment Rules also provides for the obligation of all able-bodied prisoners to work. It therefore appears from the above legislative provisions that, as a general rule, convicted prisoners are obliged to perform prison labour, even if they have the right to be given suitable work, in accordance with sections 24(1) and 64 of the Execution of Punishment Act.

The Committee therefore again requests the Government to indicate, as regards the abovementioned section 61 of the Execution of Punishment Act, how the voluntary consent of the prisoners to work for private employers is guaranteed, so that it is free from the menace of any penalty, including any loss of privileges or other disadvantages following from a refusal to work, and to supply copies of relevant provisions. Please also communicate a copy of Ordinance No. LS-03-416 (1991) of the Minister of Justice concerning prisoners’ remuneration, referred to by the Government in its report, as well as copies of any other texts issued by the Ministry of Justice concerning the conditions under which prisoners may work for private employers, to which reference is made in section 61(1) of the Execution of Punishment Act. The Committee would appreciate it if the Government would also supply a sample copy of an agreement concluded by the administration of a penitentiary institution and a private company concerning the use of prison labour, as referred to in the Government’s report.