Observation (CEACR) - adoptée 2022, publiée 111ème session CIT (2023)

Convention (n° 105) sur l'abolition du travail forcé, 1957 - Mozambique (Ratification: 1977)

Autre commentaire sur C105

Observation

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

Article 1(a) and (b) of the Convention. Compulsory labour for persons identified as “unproductive” or “anti-social”. For many years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the need to amend the Ministerial Directive of 15 June 1985 on the evacuation of towns, under which persons identified as “unproductive” or “anti-social” may be arrested and sent to re-education centres or assigned to productive sectors. The Committee notes that the Government reiterates in its report that re-education centres no longer exist and persons are no longer identified as “unproductive” or “anti-social”. The Government adds that the 1985 Directive has become obsolete and implicitly abrogated as a result of the revision of the Penal Code adopted in December 2019, which provides that any legislation contrary to the Penal Code is abrogated. While taking due note of this information the Committee notes with regret that the Government did not seize this new opportunity of the revision of the Penal Code to formally repeal this Directive. The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to formally repeal the Ministerial Directive of 15 June 1985 on the evacuation of towns so as to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention and with the practice indicated, thereby ensuring legal certainty.

Article 1(b) and (c). Imposition of sentences of imprisonment involving an obligation to work for the purposes of economic development and as a means of labour discipline. For many years, the Committee has been emphasizing the need to amend or repeal certain provisions of Act No. 5/82 of 9 June 1982 concerning the defence of the economy, amended by Act No. 9/87, which provide for the punishment of types of conduct which, directly or indirectly, jeopardize economic development, prevent the implementation of the national plan and are detrimental to the material or spiritual well-being of the population. Sections 10, 12, 13 and 14 of the Act prescribe prison sentences, which may involve compulsory labour, for repeated cases of failure to fulfil the economic obligations set forth in instructions, directives, procedures and so forth, governing the preparation or implementation of the national State plan. Section 7 of the Act penalizes unintentional conduct (such as negligence, the lack of a sense of responsibility and so forth) resulting in the infringement of managerial or disciplinary standards.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that an analysis of Act No. 5/82 (as amended by Act No. 9/87) was carried out, as a result of which it appeared that the approach adopted by Act No. 5/82 is no longer applicable in the current economic context, and the subjects covered by such legislation have been incorporated in the Penal Code and other laws regulating economic activity. The Government adds that the adoption of more recent regulations led to the automatic abrogation of the provisions of Act No. 5/82. The Committee regrets that the Government did not take the opportunity of the adoption of the new Penal Code and other laws regulating economic activity to ensure that the national legislative framework complies with the Convention and to guarantee legal certainty. It trusts that the Government will not fail to take the necessary measures to formally repeal the provisions of Act No. 5/82 concerning the defence of the economy, as amended by Act No. 9/87, which although not applied in practice are contrary to the Convention.

Article 1(d). Penalties imposed for participation in strikes. The Committee notes that, under section 268(3) of the Labour Act (Act No. 23/2007), striking workers who are in violation of the provisions of section 202(1) and section 209(1) (obligation to ensure a minimum service) face disciplinary penalties and may incur criminal liability, in accordance with the general legislation. The Committee notes the Government’s general indication that the new Penal Code provides for the penalties applicable as a result of a violation of section 268(3) of the Labour Act. The Committee however observes that no provision in the Penal Code explicitly refers to the penalties that may be faced by striking workers in cases where their criminal liability is incurred. It recalls, in this regard that, in accordance with Article 1(d) of the Convention, persons who participate peacefully in a strike cannot be liable to penal sanctions involving compulsory labour. Referring also to its 2021 observation on the application of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), the Committee requests the Government to ensure that no sanctions involving compulsory labour can be imposed on workers who participate peacefully in a strike and to provide information on any revision of section 268(3) of the Labour Act aiming at suppressing the reference to criminal liability. In the meantime, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the nature of the penalties that may be imposed on striking workers when their criminal liability is incurred pursuant to the provisions of section 268(3) of the Labour Act, specifying the provisions of the Penal Code applicable in such case.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.