Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Tajikistan (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:

Repetition

Communication of texts. The Committee notes the Law on political parties, the Law on information and the Law on assemblies, meetings, demonstrations and peaceful processions, supplied by the Government with its report. The Committee requests the Government to supply copies of the Broadcasting Law and the Law governing the press, to which reference is made in section 17 of the Law on information.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for the expression of political or ideological views. The Committee previously noted that the Criminal Code provides for sanctions of imprisonment (which involves compulsory prison labour by virtue of section 107(1) of the Code on the Execution of Criminal Sentences) for the “inciting national, racial or religious hatred” made publicly or through mass media (section 189). The Committee also noted that, under section 160 of the Criminal Code, organizers of public meetings, assemblies, rallies, demonstrations and picketing conducted in violation of the established procedure are punishable with sanctions of imprisonment (which involves compulsory prison labour as explained above).

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 peaceful 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 freedom of expression of political or ideological views may be equally restricted by way of prohibition of various kinds of meetings or assemblies, which is also contrary to the Convention, if such prohibition is enforced by sanctions involving compulsory labour.

Noting that the Government’s report contains no information on the above issues, the Committee hopes that the Government will not fail to provide, in its next report, information on the application of the abovementioned sections 160 and 189 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 whether they are applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

The Committee previously noted that under sections 307-1, 307-2 and 308 of the Criminal Code relating to the “extremist activities”, the following acts are punishable with sanctions of imprisonment (which involves compulsory prison labour): public appeal to performing extremist activities (including through mass media or the Internet), establishment of an extremist group or organization and participation in such a group or organization or a political party prohibited by a court decision.

Referring to the above explanations, the Committee requests the Government once again to provide, in its next report, information on the application of the abovementioned sections in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their scope, and clarifying in particular the notion of “extremist activities”, so as to enable the Committee to ascertain their conformity with the Convention.

Article 1(c). Penal sanctions applicable to public officials. The Committee previously noted that, under section 322(1) of the Criminal Code (“Negligence”), the non-performance or improper performance by a public official of his/her duties as the result of a negligent attitude, causing substantial harm to legitimate rights and interests of persons or organizations, or to state interests, is punishable by compulsory community works or correctional labour.

Noting that the Government’s report contains no information on this issue, the Committee again requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the court decisions passed under section 322(1) of the Criminal Code, which could define or illustrate its scope, including sample copies of such decisions, in order to enable the Committee to ascertain whether this provision is not used as a means of labour discipline within the meaning of the Convention.

Article 1(d). Sanctions for participating in strikes. Referring to its comments made under Article 1(a) of the Convention concerning section 160 of the Criminal Code, under which organizers of public meetings, assemblies, rallies, demonstrations and picketing conducted in violation of the established procedure are punishable with sanctions of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour), the Committee previously requested the Government to indicate whether this section is applicable to participants in unlawful strikes. The Committee notes the Government’s statement in the report that the Law on assemblies, meetings, demonstrations and peaceful processions does not contain provisions concerning strikes. It also notes the Government’s indication that measures are being taken with a view to amending this Law.

Referring also to its comments made under the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), the Committee hopes that the Government will provide, in its next report, information on measures taken or envisaged with a view to ensuring that no penal sanctions involving compulsory labour can be imposed on a worker for the mere fact of a peaceful participation in a strike.