Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Kazakhstan (Ratification: 2001)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the following matters raised in its previous direct request:

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Punishment for expressing political views. 1. The Committee notes that the Criminal Code provides for various sanctions involving compulsory labour (such as deprivation of freedom and restriction of freedom, compulsory participation in public works and correctional labour) for the “incitement of social, national, tribal, racial or religious enmity” (section 164), for the “creation or participation in the activity of illegal public association” which proclaims or carries out in practice racial, national, tribal, social, class or religious intolerance (section 337) and for the “violation of the procedure for the organization and conducting of rallies, meetings, picketing, street marches or demonstrations”, if such acts entailed disruption of transport or caused considerable damage to the rights and legitimate interests of citizens and organizations (section 334). The Committee notes that the sanctions of deprivation of freedom and restriction of freedom involve compulsory labour under procedures and conditions defined by the Code governing the execution of penal sentences (sections 99 and 47).

The Committee recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It refers in this connection to paragraph 154 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour, where it observed that the Convention does not prohibit punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence, incite to violence or engage in preparatory acts aimed at violence; but sanctions involving compulsory labour fall within the scope of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the expression of views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system, whether such prohibition is imposed by law or by a discretionary administrative decision.

The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide in its next report, information on the application of the abovementioned sections 164, 334 and 337 of the Criminal Code in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their scope, so as to enable the Committee to ascertain their conformity with the Convention.

2. The Committee notes that, under section 181-1 of the Code of Administrative Offences, “violation of the procedure for the organization and conducting of public gatherings, meetings, street marches and demonstrations” is punishable with “administrative arrest” for a term of up to 15 days, which involves an obligation to perform labour under the supervision and control of local authorities, by virtue of section 322 of the above Code. Referring to its comments in point 1 of this direct request, the Committee asks the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the application in practice of section 181-1 of the Code of Administrative Offences, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.

3. The Committee notes that, according to section 22 of the Law on Social Associations, of 31 May 1996, individuals (including officials in state agencies and members of the governing body of a social association) may be held liable for violation of the provisions of this Law. The Committee asks the Government to clarify the scope of such liability, indicating the applicable sanctions.

Article 1(c). Sanctions applicable to public servants. The Committee notes that, under section 316 of the Criminal Code, a failure to execute or improper execution by an official of his duties as the result of his unscrupulous or negligent attitude towards service, if this entails significant violation of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens or organizations, or interests of the society or the State, is punishable by correctional labour, or by compulsory participation in public works, or by detention under arrest. In order to enable the Committee to ascertain that section 316 is not used as a means of labour discipline within the meaning of the Convention, please supply information on its application in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.