ILO-en-strap
NORMLEX
Information System on International Labour Standards
NORMLEX Home > Country profiles >  > Comments

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Angola (Ratification: 1976)

Display in: French - SpanishView all

The Committee notes that no report has been received from the Government. 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:

Prison labour. 1. In earlier comments, the Committee has noted the statement by the Government that the legal basis of prison labour that existed under the previous regime is no longer in force, prison labour being governed by the Penal Code, and that certain prisoners are exempted from the obligation to perform prison labour. The Committee again asks the Government to furnish a copy of the Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure at present in force, of Act No. 4-D/80 of 21 November 1980 respecting detention pending trial and any text dealing with the organisation of prisons and production camps, since in the absence of these texts the Committee is unable to ascertain the conformity of the legislation with the Convention.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. 2. The Committee has previously noted from the statement by the Government that various legislative decrees that formerly governed freedom of expression, the right of association and the right of meeting have been repealed by section 84 of the Constitution, that no legislation has been drafted to govern the exercise of these rights and freedoms, which are guaranteed by section 22 of the Constitution, and that Act No. 7/78 of 26 May 1978 has repealed Title II of Book II of the Penal Code, under which infringements of the provisions of the above-mentioned legislative decrees were punished.

The Committee notes that sentences of imprisonment may be inflicted under the following provisions of Act No. 7/78 of 10 June 1978 and, with a view to ascertaining whether the scope of these provisions is compatible with Article 1(a) of the Convention, it asks the Government to furnish full information concerning their application in practice, including the number of sentences pronounced and copies of the judgements handed out:

(a)section 8, under which a sentence of imprisonment can be inflicted on any person who makes, reproduces in public, divulges or attempts to divulge in any form whatever assertions that he knows to be false or seriously distorted and damaging to the reputation of the State or its prestige abroad;

(b)section 24(1) and (2), under which, in particular, a sentence of imprisonment can be inflicted for any attempt to disturb public order or the peace by any means whatsoever, particularly by disseminating false or tendentious news or malicious predictions likely to cause alarm, anxiety, discontent or public disorder and for drafting, using, distributing, attempting to distribute or holding written texts or other means of communication leading to the same result.

The Committee also asks the Government to furnish a copy of any text adopted on the maintenance of law and order, freedom of expression, freedom of meeting and freedom of association.

Article 1(c). 3. With reference to its observation, the Committee notes that by virtue of sections 10 and 11(1)(c) of Decree No. 83-A/81 of 7 November 1981, absences that are not properly justified or are not accepted by the management of the enterprise are considered to be unwarranted offences with consequences including "punishment under the law".

The Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures taken or under consideration to ensure that the provisions of title I of Act No. 11/75 and, in particular, the designation of crime of passive resistance to work, punishable by a sentence of imprisonment in a labour camp, shall not be applied to the authors of unwarranted offences leading to punishment under the law.

4. The Committee again asks the Government to furnish the text of the Merchant Shipping Penal and Disciplinary Code at present in force.

Article 1(d). 5. In earlier direct requests, the Committee has referred to restrictions on the right to strike provided for under sections 8(4), 11 and 18 of Legislative Decree No. 3/75 of 8 January 1975, failure to observe which makes a person liable to a sentence of imprisonment involving the obligation to work by virtue of sections 22(b) and 28 of the same Decree. The Committee has noted, from the report the Government furnished in 1981, that the right to strike is not subject to restrictions under the Constitution, that Legislative Decree No. 3/75 was adopted before independence and that new legislation was being drafted on the exercise of trade union rights.

The Committee notes that, by virtue of section 23(1) and (2) of Act No. 7/78 of 10 June 1978, a sentence of imprisonment can be inflicted on those who encourage, prepare or organise the closing or paralysis of a work centre by the workers or who attempt to do so.

The Committee hopes that measures will be taken shortly to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention on this point and that the Government will indicate the provisions adopted for the purpose.

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