Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2011, publiée 101ème session CIT (2012)

Convention (n° 105) sur l'abolition du travail forcé, 1957 - Togo (Ratification: 1999)

Autre commentaire sur C105

Observation

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

The Committee notes with regret 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 matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Repetition
Article 1(a), (d) and (e) of the Convention. In a previous direct request, the Committee asked the Government to provide certain legislative texts in order to ascertain that there were no provisions in the national legislation under which any form of forced or compulsory labour could be imposed in any of the cases listed in the Convention. The Government provided a copy of Act No. 2002-027 of 25 September 2002 regarding press cards, the French Act of 1 July 1901 respecting contracts of association, which it indicated regulated freedom of association in Togo, and Decree No. 91-167 of 31 May 1991 organizing the right to strike in public services.
In its comments concerning the application of Convention No. 29, the Committee has been requesting the Government for a number of years to provide it with copies of any texts establishing practical arrangements and regulations for prison labour which may have been adopted pursuant to sections 22(2), 26(2) and 35(3) of the Penal Code. The Government has constantly replied that no such texts have been adopted. The Committee however noted that the above sections of the Penal Code provide for the possibility for persons sentenced to reclusion and imprisonment to work. It also noted from the Government’s report under Convention No. 29, received in October 2000, that in practice, pre-trial and other prisoners not convicted by a court of law are not compelled to perform any work other than the cleaning of cells and their immediate surroundings. The Committee was therefore bound to consider that, even though the texts to give effect to the above sections of the Penal Code have not been adopted, work may be imposed in practice on prisoners sentenced to reclusion or imprisonment.
The Government indicated to the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in June 2009 that no use was made in practice of prison work. Texts are to be adopted in the context of the programme of modernizing the justice system, taking into account the issue of prison labour. The Government indicated that they would be provided to the Office once they have been adopted.
The Committee trusts that the Government will be in a position to provide information with its next report on the programme for the modernization of the justice system and its effects in relation to the texts governing prison labour. In the meantime, it recalls that it previously drew the Government’s attention to the following provisions of the legislation of Togo, which may fall under the scope of Article 1(a), (d) and (e) of the Convention.
Penal Code:
– section 182(1), which provides that “whoever participates on the public highway in a procession, gathering or on any other demonstration impeding the public circulation, without having received prior administrative authorization, shall be punished with a fine of from 2,000 to 30,000 francs”, read together with section 36, under which “in case of failure to pay the police fine within the allotted time, the fine may be replaced by penal labour at the rate of one day’s work for a 500 franc fine”;
– section 182(2), which provides that “the organizers of unauthorized demonstrations on the public highway, even if they have not themselves participated in the demonstrations, shall be punished with one to six months of imprisonment and a fine of from 20,000 to 100,000 francs, or one of these two penalties only”, also read together with section 36; and
– section 217, which provides that “whoever has participated in a concerted work stoppage outside the current regulations shall be punished with from one to 20 days of penal labour or a 2,000 to 30,000 franc fine” (clause 1), and that “the organizers of the concerted work stoppage shall be punished with between one and six months of imprisonment” (clause 2).

Act of 1 July 1901 regarding contracts of association:

– section 8(1), which provides that “any person who has contravened the provisions of section 5 shall be punished with a 16 to 200 franc fine and, in the event of a second offence, with a double fine”, read together with section 36 of the Penal Code. Section 5 concerns the formalities with respect to the requirement of a prior declaration, changes that have occurred in the association’s administration or management, and modifications that have been made to their statutes;
– section 8(2), which provides that “the founders, directors or administrators of an association which has been illegally maintained or reconstituted after the judgement of dissolution shall be punished with a fine of from 16 to 5,000 francs and six days to one year of imprisonment”, while section 8(3) provides that “any persons who have facilitated meetings of members of the dissolved association by granting them the use of premises available to them shall be liable to the same penalty”; and
– section 15, which makes the penalties established in section 8(2) applicable to the representatives or directors of a religious congregation who have not complied with the provisions concerning the keeping of a list of the congregation members and the presentation of such a list at the request of the prefect.

The Committee once again asks the Government to indicate how these various provisions are applied in practice.

Article 1(a). The Committee notes Act No. 2004-15 of 27 August 2004 amending Act No. 98-4 of 11 February 1998 issuing the Media and Communications Code, which had previously been amended in 2000 and 2002. The Committee notes that the Act abolishes the sentences of imprisonment for violations of the provisions respecting the press and offences which may be related to freedom of expression. However, the Committee notes that section 86 of the new Media and Communications Code establishes a penalty of between three months and one year of imprisonment and a fine for any person who, through the various means referred to in new section 85, has incited the population to violations of the laws of the Republic and that, in the event of a second offence, double the maximum penalty may be imposed. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the manner in which effect is given to these provisions in practice by providing copies of court decisions handed down under section 86 of the new Media and Communication Code.

The Committee also referred previously to section 25 of Act No. 91-4 of 12 April 1991 issuing the Charter of Political Parties, under the terms of which “any person who leads or runs a political party in violation of the provisions of the Charter shall be liable to imprisonment of from three to 12 months and a fine of from 100,000 to 500,000 CFA francs, or one of these two penalties only”. The Committee previously noted the indication in the Government’s report that this section had not been applied up to now. Under these conditions, the Committee trusts that the Government will see no inconvenience in taking measures with a view to repealing this section. It requests the Government to provide information on this matter in its next report.