ILO-en-strap
NORMLEX
Information System on International Labour Standards
NORMLEX Home > Country profiles >  > Comments

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) - Morocco (Ratification: 1957)

Display in: French - SpanishView all

Article 2(2)(d) of the Convention. Requisitioning of persons. For many years the Committee has been emphasizing the need to amend or repeal several legislative texts which authorize the requisitioning of persons and of goods in order to satisfy national needs (the Dahirs of 10 August 1915 and 25 March 1918, as retained in the Dahir of 13 September 1938 and reintroduced by Decree
No. 2-63-436 of 6 November 1963). These provisions go beyond what is authorized under Article 2(2)(d) of the Convention, under the terms of which requisitioning, and consequently the imposition of work, should be confined to situations endangering the existence or well-being of the whole or part of the population.

In view of the consensus obtained with the social partners to amend the provisions of the legislation and the fact that in practice the public authorities do not appear to make use of these provisions for the requisitioning of persons, the Committee expressed the hope in its previous observation that contacts between the Department of Labour and the Ministry of the Interior would rapidly result in the Dahir of 1938 being brought into conformity with the Convention. Noting with regret that the Government has not provided any information on the progress achieved with a view to the amendment of the Dahir of 1938, the Committee trusts that the Government will not fail to take all the necessary measures to ensure that the national legislation is in conformity with the Convention and with the indicated practice.

Article 25. Effective and strictly applied penal sanctions. In its previous comments, the Committee expressed its reservations concerning the dissuasive nature of the penalties set out in section 12 of the Labour Code against persons requisitioning employees to perform forced labour or to work against their will (a fine of between 25,000 and 30,000 dirhams and, in the event of repeated offences, a fine of double that amount and imprisonment for between six days and three months, or one of these two penalties). The Committee emphasized that recourse to forced labour is a serious offence and that the penalties that may be imposed have to be considered effective enough to be of a really dissuasive nature. In its last report, the Government indicates that the penalties set out in section 12 of the Labour Code are deemed sufficiently repressive and that the courts opt for the penalty that appears to be the most appropriate, on the basis of the facts and circumstances of the offence.

The Committee recalls the importance of the penalties set out by the national legislation in cases of the exaction of forced labour being of a penal nature, as required by Article 25 of the Convention, and of them being considered really effective. The Committee has already indicated that a fine or a short prison sentence cannot be considered an effective penalty in view of the gravity of the offence, on the one hand, and the need for the penalties to be of a dissuasive nature, on the other. While noting that the penalties set out in section 12 of the Labour Code correspond to the highest level of penalties established by the Labour Code, the Committee hopes that the Government will be able to re-examine this matter, either in the context of a revision of the Labour Code or by criminalizing forced labour in the Penal Code and making persons who have recourse to forced labour liable to the penalties applicable for criminal offences.

© Copyright and permissions 1996-2024 International Labour Organization (ILO) | Privacy policy | Disclaimer