Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2014, publiée 104ème session CIT (2015)

Convention (n° 29) sur le travail forcé, 1930 - République dominicaine (Ratification: 1956)

Autre commentaire sur C029

Observation

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

The Committee notes the joint observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) and the Employers’ Confederation of the Dominican Republic (COPARDOM), received on 27 August 2014, as well as the observations submitted jointly by the Autonomous Confederation of Workers’ Unions (CASC), the National Confederation of Trade Union Unity (CNUS) and the National Confederation of Dominican Workers (CNDT), received on 2 September 2014.

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. 1. Trafficking in persons. The Committee previously noted the legislative and institutional framework introduced to combat trafficking in persons and referred particularly to: Act No. 137-03 of 7 August 2003 on the smuggling of migrants and trafficking in persons; the establishment of the Inter-Institutional Commission to Combat Trafficking in Persons and Smuggling (CITIM); the adoption of the National Action Plan to Combat Trafficking in Persons and the Smuggling of Migrants (2009–14); and the measures taken to implement the Action Plan’s three main strategic areas (prevention, the prosecution and punishment of perpetrators, and the protection of victims).

The Committee notes that, in its latest report, the Government has not provided any information on new measures taken to combat trafficking in persons. The Committee notes that, in their final observations in 2013, both the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) and the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) referred to difficulties in the enforcement of Act No. 137-03, with a small number of convictions, and in the implementation of the National Action Plan. CEDAW expressed its concern about the extent of trafficking in human beings, especially women and girls (documents CERD/C/DOM/CO/13-14 and CEDAW/C/DOM/CO/6-7). The Committee has also noted the report of the Specialized Unit Against Anti-Migrant Smuggling and Trafficking in Persons (PECTIMTP), covering the period 2013–14, available on the Internet website of the Public Prosecutor of the Republic. It notes that during this period, this Unit handled 19 cases of trafficking and 14 cases of commercial sexual exploitation. Furthermore, between January 2013 and February 2014, the courts handed down prison sentences ranging from two to 15 years in four cases.

The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the assessment and impact of measures taken in the context of the National Action Plan against Trafficking in Persons and the Smuggling of Migrants, which expires at the end of 2014, as well as on the measures taken to overcome the obstacles that have been identified. Please also provide information on the strengthening of the capacities of the bodies responsible for enforcing Act No. 137-03 of 2003 on the smuggling of migrants and trafficking in persons and on the means at their disposal, as well as on the legal proceedings instigated and the penalties handed down. Finally, the Committee requests the Government to specify the measures taken to ensure that the victims of trafficking benefit from psychological, medical and legal support, which enables them to assert their rights and contributes to their social rehabilitation.

2. Vulnerability of Haitian migrant workers or workers of Haitian origin to the imposition of forced labour. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the repeated observations made by trade union organizations concerning the situation of Haitian workers who continued to enter and live in the Dominican Republic without documents, which reinforced their situation of vulnerability. It also noted the concerns expressed by the CERD at the labour exploitation of migrant workers who, as they are undocumented, work under oral contracts or in the informal sector, have limited access to social benefits and do not assert their rights due to the fear of being deported or expelled. In this respect, the Committee noted measures taken by the Government to reinforce labour inspection activities in the agricultural sector, including the publication in 2012 of an inspection protocol for the agricultural sector, which contains relevant legislative texts, as well as monitoring mechanisms that can be used to detect forced labour.

The Committee regrets that the Government has not provided any information on the measures taken to ensure a better protection of Haitian workers. It recalls that the situation of vulnerability which generally affects migrant workers is aggravated when they are undocumented. As a result, due to fear of reprisals or expulsion, these workers are not always in a position to assert their rights and are more likely to become victims of a situation of forced labour. In this respect, the Committee notes that during the discussion on the application of the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111), which took place at the meeting of the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in June 2014, the Government reported on the adoption of legislative and practical measures to deal with discrimination against Haitians. It referred in particular to Decree No. 327-13 of 20 November 2013 establishing the National Plan for the Regularization of Foreigners, and to Act No. 169-14 of 23 May 2014 which intends to resolve the situation of Dominicans of Haitian origin. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the measures taken to improve the situation of Haitian workers so as to guarantee that they do not find themselves in situations constituting forced labour, that is, situations in which they are obliged to perform work under threat and without being able to give their valid consent. Please also indicate the measures taken to step up controls in the sectors in which these workers are employed (agriculture, construction and services) and to enable them to assert their rights when they are victims of such practices, irrespective of their status.

Article 25. Criminalization of and penalties for forced labour. The Committee notes that, in their joint observations of 2014, the trade union confederations consider that the legislative framework to combat forced labour is incomplete. They specify that although the Constitution and Labour Code contain the principle that nobody should be forced to work against his or her will, neither the Penal Code nor the Labour Code define the constitutive elements of the offence of “forced labour”, nor do they provide for applicable penalties. The trade unions consider that this has an impact on the work of the labour inspectorate, since labour inspectors can only draw up a report on a legal infringement and submit it to the courts if they have witnessed a situation considered to be a violation of the law. This is not the case with forced labour. In this respect, the Committee stresses that it is vital to make forced labour a criminal offence and to define its constitutive elements so that the authorities responsible for enforcing the law – labour inspectorate, public prosecutor and judges – have a legal basis to enable them to classify situations of forced labour, carry out adequate investigations and initiate corresponding judicial proceedings. The Committee requests the Government to submit comments on the joint observations of the CASC, the CNUS and the CNDT, as well as information on legal decisions handed down in cases of forced labour other than those dealing with trafficking in persons.