Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 83rd ILC session (1996)

Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) - Egypt (Ratification: 1955)

1. Use of conscripts for non-military purposes. In its earlier comments, the Committee asked the Government to provide information on the practical application of section 1 of Act No. 76 of 1973 (amended by Act No. 98 of 1975) concerning general service for young persons on completion of their studies, and of section 21(c) of Act No. 127 of 1980 respecting national military service.

The Committee notes the indication in the Government's report to the effect that the general service can be considered as "minor communal services" exempted from the scope of the Convention at Article 2, paragraph 2(e). The Committee wishes to refer to paragraph 37 of its General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour in which it reiterated the provision of the Convention and indicated that the services must be "communal services" performed "in the direct interest of the community" and not relate to the execution of workers intended to benefit a wider group and that the "members of the community" (i.e. the community which has to perform the services) or their "direct" representatives (e.g. the village council) must "have the right to be consulted in regard to the need for such services". The general service as provided for under section 1 of Act No. 76 of 1973 (amended by Act No. 98 of 1975) does not appear to contain the above-mentioned characteristics.

The Government indicates in its report that the general service is voluntary and the practical application of the Act shows that persons not desiring to participate in the scheme can apply for exemption before the Ministry of Social Affairs under section 3 of the Act modified as appropriate.

The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the practical application of the scheme including information on the number of persons who apply for exemption and those whose applications have been refused.

2. Article 25 of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that article 13 of the Constitution prohibits the unlawful exaction of forced or compulsory labour but that no provision is made for specific penalties. In particular, section 375 of the Penal Code makes no provision in such cases. In the Labour Code, the penalty prescribed for an employer who requires a worker to perform work other than that for which he was engaged is a small fine (sections 54 and 170).

The Committee notes the Government's indication in its report that punishment provided for in relevant sections of the Labour Code is strong enough to dissuade employers from forcing workers to perform work other than that for which they were engaged. The Committee wishes to point out once again that persons not working in return for a wage and other categories of workers remain outside the scope of the Labour Code (sections 1 and 3).

The Committee recalls that Article 25 of the Convention requires the ratifying State to ensure that the unlawful exaction of forced or compulsory labour is made punishable as a penal offence and that the penalties are really adequate and strictly enforced.

The Committee notes in this regard the Government's reference in the report to section 375 of the Penal Code which punishes the use of violence, brutality, terror menaces or illegal practices with imprisonment and a fine where they interfere with: (1) the right of any person to work; or (2) the right of any person to employ or refrain from employing any person whatsoever. The Committee wishes to point out that the right of any person to refrain from working is not protected in the same manner as the situations covered by the above-mentioned provision.

Referring to the Government's earlier indication to the effect that it was reviewing the national legislation in order to bring it into line with international Conventions; that the labour legislation was being reviewed with ILO assistance; and that the Ministry of Manpower had set up working parties to re-examine ratified Conventions to ensure that they are strictly applied, the Committee hopes that, in the review of the legislation, the necessary steps will be taken to complete the legislation and bring it into full conformity with the Convention, for example, by modifying the scope of section 375 of the Penal Code and reinforcing the sanctions prescribed, or in any other suitable manner, and that the Government will indicate the action taken.

3. In its previous direct requests, the Committee asked the Government, in connection with sections 138(5) (as amended by Act No. 71 of 1973), and section 141 of Act No. 232 of 1959, to provide information on how these provisions are applied in practice to applications by officers of the armed forces to resign.

The Committee notes the Government's repeated indication in its report, that the acceptance or refusal of resignations is a matter of organization and administration of manpower and is not related to forced labour.

The Committee once again refers to paragraphs 67 to 73 of its General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour, and recalls that persons who have voluntarily entered the service - particularly career servicemen - may not be deprived of the right to leave the service in peace time within a reasonable period, either at specified intervals, or with previous notice.

The Committee wishes to ascertain whether the practical effect given to section 141 of Act No. 232 is compatible with the Convention. The Committee again asks the Government to provide information on the criteria applied in accepting or refusing a request for resignation, along with other relevant information on the acceptance in practice of such requests.

The Committee hopes that the Government will provide this information, together with the copies that the Committee has already requested of Act No. 232 of 1959 as amended by Act No. 71 of 1973 and all the laws and regulations concerning employment in the public service which contain provisions on resignation.