Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Chile (Ratification: 1999)

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(d) of the Convention. Imprisonment with compulsory labour as punishment for participation in strikes. In its previous direct request, the Committee referred to section 11 of the State Security Act, which states that collective work stoppages, walkouts or strikes in public services or public utilities or in activities pertaining to production, transport or commerce that are carried out in a manner inconsistent with the law and disturb the peace or disrupt public utilities or services the compulsory operation of which is established by law, or which harm a vital industry, shall constitute an offence and be liable to imprisonment (presidio) or confinement to a specific place in the territory (relegación) (under the terms of section 32 of the Penal Code, persons sentenced to the penalty of presidio are obliged to carry out work as determined by the prison regulations). Incitement or encouragement of the abovementioned unlawful forms of conduct is subject to the same penalties. The Committee also referred to various provisions of the Labour Code concerning strike procedure (sections 372, 373 and 374) and the exercise of the right to strike (sections 381, 384 and 385), which restrict the exercise of the right to strike and are the subject of comments by the Committee regarding the application of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87). The Committee previously noted in particular that the definition of services in which strikes may be banned under section 384 and the list of enterprises in which workers may not strike – drawn up every year by the government authorities – are too broad and go beyond essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely, services the interruption of which would endanger the life, safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee requested the Government to take the necessary steps to amend or repeal the provisions of section 11 of the State Security Act.

The Government indicates in its report that what is punishable under section 11 is any mobilization which signifies the interruption or suspension of production, transport or basic services for the population and which would have serious consequences for the latter, with public welfare and the normal functioning of public utility services being deemed to be of greater importance than the interests of those involved in the stoppage. The Government added, however, that it was for the legislative authority to approve any amendment to the legislation in question.

The Committee notes that the Government, in its report on the application of Convention No. 87, states that it has noted the Committee’s observations and that these will be taken into account in forthcoming discussions to be held to bring the national legislation into conformity with the provisions of the Convention.

The Committee hopes that the Government will be able to provide information in its next report on the progress made in amending or repealing the abovementioned provisions with a view to bringing the national legislation into conformity with the Convention, so that the penalty of imprisonment with compulsory labour cannot be imposed for participation in strikes.