Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) - Malaysia (Ratification: 1957)
Protocol of 2014 to the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 - Malaysia (Ratification: 2022)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its earlier comments.

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. In its earlier comments, the Committee raised a question concerning the possibility for career military officers to leave the service. The Government indicates in its report that officers can opt to leave the service at the end of the agreed contract of their choice or at the retirement age. The Committee refers to paragraph 72 of its General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour, in which it observed that, under the Convention, career military servicemen who have voluntarily entered into an engagement cannot be deprived of the right to leave the service in peacetime within a reasonable period, either at specified intervals, or with previous notice, subject to the conditions which may normally be required to ensure the continuity of the service. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that officers have the possibility to leave the service at their own request, before attaining the age of retirement, even when they are not yet entitled to retirement benefits. Please also provide copies of the legislation, rules and regulations governing the resignation from the armed forces.

Article 2(2)(c). The Committee previously noted the Government’s indications in its report concerning an agreement signed between the Prison Department and a private company concerning the employment of prisoners. The Government indicated that participation in joint-venture schemes with private companies is voluntary for prisoners, who sign a form of consent. The Committee has noted an application form to be signed by a prisoner, communicated by the Government with its latest report, in which a prisoner voluntarily applies for a job within the framework of the detention centre’s workshop.

As the Committee repeatedly pointed out, it is only when work or service is performed in conditions approximating a free employment relationship that work by prisoners for private companies can be held compatible with the explicit prohibition of the Convention; this necessarily requires the formal consent of the persons concerned, as well as further guarantees and safeguards covering the essential elements of a free labour relationship, such as the payment of normal wages and social security, occupational safety and health, etc. (see paragraphs 128-143 of the Committee’s General Report to the 89th Session of the International Labour Conference, 2001). The Committee has always emphasized that conditions approximating a free labour relationship are the most reliable indicator of the voluntariness of labour; such conditions would not have to emulate all of the conditions which are applicable to a free market, but in the areas of wages, social security, safety and health and labour inspection, the circumstances in which the prison labour is performed should not be so disproportionately lower than the free market that it could be characterized as exploitative.

The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information on the conditions of work of prisoners working for a private company, supplying copies of relevant texts, as well as a copy of the agreement between the prison department and a private company referred to above. In connection with a workers’ declaration included in the abovementioned application form, according to which a prisoner will not make any accident-related claims while undertaking the job, the Committee requests the Government to describe, more particularly, the occupational safety and health conditions applicable to prisoners working for a private company, as well as the role of labour inspection in this area.