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

Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Angola (Ratification: 1976)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report contains no reply to previous comments. It hopes that the next report will include full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Adoption and communication of legislation which may have an impact on the application of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the revision of the Penal Code is being carried out in the context of a process of participation in which State and civil society bodies have already taken part, and that a copy of the new Code will be transmitted to the Office as soon as it has been adopted. The Committee requests the Government to provide a copy of the new Penal Code as soon as it has been adopted. Noting the copy of the 1991 Press Act, the Committee would also be grateful if the Government would provide a copy of the 2006 Press Act as well as any implementing regulations.

The Committee takes advantage of this process of revising the penal legislation to draw the Government’s attention to the fact that it would be preferable if the new Penal Code did not provide for prison sentences for press offences or participation in strikes in order to avoid any problems relating to the application of the Convention. In this regard, the Committee recalls that, under the Convention, it is prohibited to exert forced labour, including prison labour, from individuals, because they have expressed certain political views or views opposed to the established political, social or economic system, or because they have participated in a strike. Accordingly, prison sentences, where they involve compulsory labour – which is the case in Angola under sections 13 and 50(c) of the Prison Regulations of 9 July 1981 – fall within the scope of the Convention when they penalize breaches of the prohibition to express views or opposition, or participation in a strike.

Article 1(c) of the Convention. Imposition of forced labour as a means of labour discipline. In reply to the Committee’s comments on the need to amend certain provisions of the Merchant Shipping Penal and Disciplinary Code, 1943, which are not in conformity with the Convention, the Government once again indicates that the revision of this Code is under way, now within the framework of the Committee set up within the Ministry of Justice which is working on a revision of the Code.

The Committee recalls that, under section 132 of the Merchant Shipping Penal and Disciplinary Code, a crew member who deserts at the port of embarkation is liable to a prison sentence of up to one year, while desertion in any other port may be punished by a sentence of two years. Under section 137, a crew member who fails to carry out orders issued by his superiors in relation to services which do not endanger the safety of the vessel may be punished by a prison sentence of one to six months. A crew member who refuses to obey an order and subsequently carries it out voluntarily may be punished by a maximum of three months’ imprisonment. These provisions are contrary to the Convention in so far as they allow prison sentences to be imposed (involving compulsory labour under sections 13 and 50(c) of the Prison Regulations of 9 July 1981) for certain breaches of labour discipline which do not endanger the safety of the vessel or the life or health of persons on board.

The Committee trusts that the process of revision of the Merchant Shipping Penal and Disciplinary Code will be completed in the near future in order to ensure that breaches of labour discipline which do not endanger the safety of the vessel or the life or health of persons on board are not punishable with a prison sentence. Please provide a copy of the new Code once adopted.

Article 1(d). Imposition of prison sentences involving compulsory labour as a punishment for having participated in strikes. In its previous comments, the Committee drew the Government’s attention to the need to amend the provisions of section 27(1) of the Strike Act (Act No. 23/91 of 15 June 1991), under which the organizers of a strike that is prohibited, declared unlawful or suspended by virtue of the law, are liable to a prison sentence and a fine. In fact, under this section, compulsory labour in the form of a prison sentence involving the obligation to work, may be imposed on the organizer of a strike that is prohibited, declared unlawful or suspended. Furthermore, the legislation also provides for restrictions on the right to strike which have the effect of making illegal certain activities which would be legitimate according to the principles of freedom of association (see the Committee’s comments concerning the application of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87)).

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Strike Act is still in the process of being revised and there is a hope that the concerns expressed by the Committee will be taken into account in this context. Taking into account its repeated comments on numerous provisions of the Strike Act, under both this Convention and Convention No. 87, the Committee hopes that the revision process will be completed shortly so that, in accordance with Article 1(d) of the Convention, the peaceful participation in a strike (without the commission of acts of violence against persons or property) may not be punished by a prison sentence.