Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) - Cameroon (Ratification: 1960)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report contains no reply to previous comments. It hopes that the next report will include full information on the following matters raised in its previous direct request:

  Article 2, paragraph 2(b) and (e), of the Convention. 1. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to section 2, paragraph 5(e), of the 1974 Labour Code and stressed the need to restrict, in compliance with Article 2, paragraph 2(e), of the Convention, the scope of the civic service required. In 1992 the Committee noted that in the draft Labour Code in process of preparation, the term "civic work of general interest" would be replaced by the term "work of general interest".

The Committee noted the Government’s indication in its report received in 1994 to the effect that in Act No. 92/007 of 14 August 1992 issuing the Labour Code, the term "work of general interest" had been purely and simply deleted in order to comply with Article 2, paragraph 2(e), of the Convention.

In fact, the 1992 Labour Code no longer contains a subsection (e) in section 2, paragraph 5. In its comments in 1994 and 1998, the Committee noted that, under section 2, paragraph 5(b), of Act No. 92/007 of 14 August 1992 promulgating the Labour Code, the term "forced or compulsory labour" does not cover "any work or service of general interest which forms part of the civic obligations of the citizens as defined in laws and regulations". The Committee again requests the Government to specify the work and services of general interest which are included in citizens’ civic obligations and to supply the texts of any relevant legislative or regulatory provisions.

2. Referring to the general observation on the Convention made in its report to the 87th Session of the International Labour Conference (1999), the Committee requests the Government to include in its next report information as to the present position in law and practice as regards:

(i)  whether there are prisons administered by private concerns, profit-making or otherwise;

(ii)  whether any private prison contractors deploy prisoners to work either inside or outside prison premises, either for the account of the contractor or for that of another enterprise;

(iii)  whether private parties are admitted by the prison authorities into prison premises of any kind for the purpose of engaging prisoners in employment;

(iv)  whether employment of prisoners outside prison premises, either for a public authority or for a private enterprise, is allowed;

(v)  the conditions in which employment under any of the above conditions takes place, in respect of remuneration (indicating the level and comparing it with any minimum wage normally applicable to such work), benefits accruing (such as pension rights and workers’ compensation), observance of occupational safety and health legislation and other conditions of employment (e.g. through labour inspection), and how those conditions are determined;

(vi)  what the source of any remuneration is (whether from public or private funds) and for what purposes it must or may be applied (e.g. for the personal use of the prisoner or if it is subject to compulsory deductions);

(vii)  for whose benefit is the product of prisoners’ work and any surplus profit deriving from it, after deduction of overheads, and how it is disbursed;

(viii)  how the consent of the prisoners concerned is guaranteed, so that it is free from the menace of any penalty, including any loss of privileges or other disadvantages following from a refusal to work.