Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Malawi (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 matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Communication of texts. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication in its report concerning the revision of the Prisons Act and reiterates its hope that the Government will supply a copy of the revised Act, as soon as it is adopted. The Committee also noted that disciplinary provisions applicable to public officers are contained in the Malawi Public Service Commission Regulations of 1989 and again requests the Government to supply a copy with its next report. It also repeats its request for copies of the laws governing the press and other media and the latest updated text of the Preservation of Public Security Act and Regulations (as well as any other provisions governing public assemblies, meetings and gatherings).

Article 1, subparagraph a, of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for the expression of views opposed to the established political, social or economic system. 1. The Committee previously noted that sentences of imprisonment (which involve compulsory prison labour under section 75 of the Prisons Act, Cap. 9:02) may be imposed under sections 47 and 48 of the Penal Code on any person who imports, publishes, sells, offers for sale, distributes or reproduces any publication prohibited under section 46 of the Act, or has such publication in his possession, or fails to deliver such publication to administrative officer or police station.

The Committee recalled 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 also referred in this connection to paragraph 154 of its General Survey of 2007 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.

Noting the Government’s commitment expressed in the report to ensure the observance of the Convention, the Committee reiterates its hope that the necessary measures will be taken to bring sections 47 and 48 of the Penal Code into conformity with the Convention. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee again requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the application of these provisions in practice, indicating the number of prosecutions made under these provisions and the penalties imposed.

2. The Committee previously noted that sentences of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed under sections 65 and 66 of the Penal Code on any person who manages, or is a member of, an unlawful society, the latter may be defined as a society “disturbing or inciting to the disturbance of peace and order in any part of the Republic” (section 64(2)(g) of the Penal Code). In the light of the above considerations, and referring also to paragraph 163 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, where it pointed out that prohibitions enforced by penalties involving compulsory labour which affect the constitution or functioning of associations either generally or where they advocate certain political or ideological views are incompatible with the Convention, the Committee again requests the Government to provide information on the application of sections 65 and 66 in practice, supplying copies of the relevant court decisions defining or illustrating their scope, so as to enable the Committee to ascertain whether they are applied in a manner compatible with the Convention. Having duly noted the Government’s statement in its report concerning technical difficulties in obtaining such information, including the need to consult the relevant departments in order to provide meaningful answers to the queries raised, the Committee nevertheless expresses the hope that the Government will not fail to provide the information requested in its next report.