Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Belize (Ratification: 1983)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report.

1. Article 1(a) of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government's indication that there have been no convictions under sections 217 and 218 of the Criminal Code dealing with seditious acts. The Committee requests the Government to continue to supply information on the application in practice of these provisions, including any convictions made as well as any court decisions defining or illustrating their scope.

2. Article 1(c). The Committee notes the Government's indication that comments concerning section 73(1) of the Harbour and Merchant Shipping Act (Ch. 191) of the Laws of Belize, 1980, which provides for the forcible return of seamen on board ship, have been noted. The Committee again expresses the hope that the above provision will be reexamined in the light of the Convention and that the Government will be in a position to report that action has been initiated to repeal the above-mentioned provision and on the results achieved.

Noting that the United Kingdom Merchant Shipping Acts, 1894, 1965 and 1974 are not listed in the Consolidated index of statutes and subsidiary legislation compiled in the framework of the West Indian Legislation Indexing Project (WILIP), the Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report whether these Acts and more particularly sections 221 to 224, 225 1(b) and (c) and 238 of the 1894 Act have been repealed and, if so, to provide a copy of the repealing legislation.

3. Article 1(c) and (d). In previous comments, the Committee referred to section 35(2) of the Trade Unions Ordinance (Ch. 238), under which a penalty of imprisonment (involving, by virtue of section 66 of the Prison Rules, an obligation to work) may be imposed on any person employed by the Government, a municipal authority or by any employer in charge of supplying any city, town, village or place, or any part thereof, with electricity or water, railway, health, sanitary or medical services or communications or any other service that may by proclamation be declared by the Governor to be a public service, if he wilfully and maliciously breaks his contract of service, knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that the probable consequences of his so doing, either alone or in combination with others, will be to cause injury or danger or grave inconvenience to the community.

The Committee also noted that, in pursuance of section 2 of the Settlement of Disputes Essential Services Act (Ch. 235), Statutory Instrument No. 92 of 1981 declared the National Fire Service, Postal Service, Monetary and Financial Services (banks, treasury, monetary authority), Airports (civil aviation and airport security services) and the Port Authority (pilots and security services) to be essential services, and Statutory Instrument No. 51 of 1988 declared the Social Security Scheme administered by the Social Security Branch, an essential service.

The Committee indicated that the imposition of penalties (even if involving an obligation to perform labour) for breaches of labour discipline or participation in strikes in essential services would not be incompatible with the Convention provided that such provisions are applicable only to essential services in the strict sense of the term that is to say services whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee had noted that the services listed in section 35(2) of the Trade Unions Ordinance and in the 1981 and 1988 Statutory Instruments, would appear to a large extent indispensable to the existence and well being of the population while in the case of other services, such as railway, most postal, monetary and civil aviation services, an interruption would not justify the imposition of sanctions involving compulsory labour under the Convention.

The Committee notes the Government's statement in its report that the above comments have been noted. Noting also the indication that in practice no prosecution under section 35(2) has been launched, the Committee again expresses the hope that steps will be taken to bring section 35(2) of the Trade Unions Ordinance into conformity with the requirements of the Convention, and that pending such action, the Government will continue to provide information on the application of this provision in practice, including any cases in which penalities of imprisonment have been imposed under this provision.