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

Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Morocco (Ratification: 1966)

The Committee notes that the Government has not transmitted a report. It also notes that the Government has not responded to the comments made in March 1991 by the Democratic Confederation of Labour (CDT) and the General Union of Moroccan Workers (UGTM) concerning the application of the Convention.

In its previous comments concerning the penalties applicable to public servants in the event of a strike, the Committee noted the information supplied by the Government to the effect that the disciplinary penalties that are applicable are those laid down in section 66 of the Dahir of 24 February 1958, issuing the general terms and conditions of employment of the public service, and that the public servant has the right to appeal to the Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court. The Committee observed, however, that section 5 of Decree No. 2-57-1465 of 8 February 1958, respecting the exercise of the right to organise by public servants, lays down that "any coordinated stoppage of work, any collective act of indiscipline may be punished without regard to the guarantees respecting discipline", and it requested the Government to indicate whether sanctions that are different from those provided for in section 66 of the above Dahir may be imposed on public servants.

The Government stated in its report for the period ending 30 June 1990 that the penalties to which public servants are liable are set out limitively in the Dahir of 1958 issuing the general terms and conditions of employment of the public service and that, in practice and to the knowledge of the Ministry of Employment, no sanctions other than those provided for in the above Dahir have ever been imposed on public servants.

The Committee notes that, in their comments, the CDT and the UGTM allege that the Government had recourse to Decree No. 2-57-1465 in order to threaten public servants and employees and oblige them to work during a strike, and that this has occurred on several occasions and particularly during the general strike of 14 December 1990, during which the Government threatened to have recourse to the above Decree, which it applies without taking into account the guarantees relating to disciplinary measures set out in the terms and conditions of employment of the public service. They consider that the Decree does not cover strikes and should not be interpreted as doing so since the Constitution, which was adopted in 1972, postdates the Decree and guarantees the right to strike. They believe that the Decree concerns cases of civil disobedience and bears no relation to strike, which is called on the grounds of specific claims and after notice has been given.

According to the CDT and the UGTM, the fact of having recourse to the above Decree in the event of a strike in the public sector or of a general strike constitutes recourse to forced and compulsory labour. With regard to the Government's statement that the sanctions applied to the public servants were those provided for under section 66 of the terms and conditions of employment of the public service and that they are not subject to judicial appeal, the above organisations consider that this statement is inexact since in the event of strikes, and particularly in 1979 and 1981, the Government arrested teachers and health-care personnel without applying section 66, which requires the opinion of joint committees. The Committee hopes that the Government will supply information concerning the allegations of the CDT and the UGTM.

[The Government is requested to provide full particulars to the Conference at its 79th Session.