Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144) - Belarus (Ratification: 1993)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2024, published 113rd ILC session (2025)

The Committee notes the observations of the Belarusian Congress of Democratic Trade Unions (BKDP), received on 30 August 2019, 31 August 2023 and 31 August 2024. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard.

Articles 1, 2 and 3(1) of the Convention. Adequate procedures. Election of representatives of employers’ and workers’ organizations. The Committee observes that the BKDP considers that the Government does not fulfil its obligations under the Convention. The BKDP argues that because of the legal impossibility of conducting activities in the country by independent trade unions, workers’ organizations cannot enjoy their right to freely elect their representatives for the purposes of the procedures to ensure tripartite consultations, as required by Article 3 of the Convention, and denounces the unlawful forced liquidation of all Belarusian independent trade unions, including the BKDP and its affiliates. The BKDP further alleges that the Tripartite Council for the Improvement of Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere (the tripartite Council) and the National Council on Labour and Social Issues (NCLSI) do not ensure the holding of effective tripartite consultations, as the pro-governmental Federation of Trade Unions of Belarus (FPB) and its affiliates are the only organizations authorized by the national legislation to act as Workers’ representatives in such bodies. The BKDP claims that the FPB is not a representative organization within the meaning of Article 1 of the Convention. The BKDP adds that it is the Government that unilaterally decides to appoint the Workers’ representatives as participants in social dialogue, limiting the possibility of other workers affiliated with independent trade unions to participate in tripartite consultations. The BKDP therefore considers that all activities allegedly implemented by Belarus under the Convention do not comply with the criteria established in its provisions. In addition, the BKDP points out that there is no sufficient publicly available information on the content and the outcome of the work carried out by the tripartite Council and the NCLSI. The BKDP indicates that, according to the information on the agenda of the NCLSI meetings held between 2022 and 2024 – available on the website of the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection (MLSP) – none of the international labour standards related to matters listed in the Convention were discussed and no official minutes or information about the decisions adopted during such meetings were available. Regarding the meetings held during the reporting period in the tripartite Council, the BKDP stresses that there is only information available on the website of the MLSP about two meetings held on 26 May and 22 September 2023, where ILO related matters were discussed, including the implementation of the present Convention.

In this context, the Committee refers to its 2023 observation regarding the implementation of Convention No. 87, where it recalled its previous comments deploring the effect of the dissolution of the BKDP on the work of the NCLSI and the tripartite Council and questioning their legitimacy. In this regard, the Committee noted with deep concern the absence of any measures taken to review the situation of the dissolved trade unions so as to ensure that they may again function and fully participate in national tripartite bodies. The Committee also refers to the Follow-up to the resolution concerning the measures recommended by the Governing Body under article 33 of the ILO Constitution on the subject of Belarus (GB.352/INS/10(Rev.1)), where the Governing Body took note of the report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus of 9 May 2024, which revealed a targeted eradication of all independent associations in Belarus since 2021. In this report’s conclusions and recommendations, the Special Rapporteur acknowledged the lack of independence of the FPB and recommended suspending its participation in the International Labour Conference. In this regard, the Committee notes the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 352nd Session (28 October–7 November 2024), requesting the Director-General to bring to the attention of the Credentials Committee of the International Labour Conference at the 113th Session (2025), the information provided in document GB.352/INS/10(Rev.1) and the discussion in the Governing Body, so that it might take it into account in its monitoring of the nomination of the Workers’ delegation of Belarus as decided by the Conference at its 112th Session (2024) and in the examination of any new objection concerning the subject.

In light of the above, the Committee recalls that “[a]ccording to Article 3, paragraph 1, of the Convention, the representatives of employers and workers who participate in the consultation procedures must be freely chosen by their respective ‘representative organisations’, that is, in accordance with the definition given in Article 1, by the ‘most representative organisations of employers and workers enjoying the right of freedom of association’”. The Committee further recalls that it is “ … important that employers’ and workers’ organizations should enjoy freedom of association, without which there could be no effective system of tripartite consultation …, since employers and workers had to be able to state their views independently” (2000 General Survey on tripartite consultation, paragraphs 32 and 39). Referring to its 2023 observation under Convention No. 87 and in light of the fact thateffective tripartite consultations cannot be expected to take place within the tripartite bodies if one of the parties is not truly independent and hence not representative in the sense of Article 1 of the Convention, the Committee strongly urges the Government to take the necessary measures to review the situation of the dissolved trade unions so as to ensure that they may again function and fully participate in national tripartite bodies, including the NCLSI and the tripartite Council, and to provide information on the concrete steps taken to that end.

Article 5(1). Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that, between 2020 and 2022, tripartite consultations were carried out through written communications with the FPB and the Confederation of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and in 2023, the tripartite Council resumed face-to-face work. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that, following tripartite consultations between 2017 and 2019 within the tripartite Council and the NCLSI, the Holidays with Pay Convention (Revised), 1970 (No. 132) and the Safety and Health in Mines Convention, 1995 (No. 176) were ratified on 13 February 2020. The Government adds that tripartite consultations were also held with regard to the reports on the application of ratified Conventions and reports on unratified Conventions sent to the ILO between 2019 and 2023. The Committee observes, however, that the Government does not provide information regarding tripartite consultations held on all the matters related to international labour standards listed by Article 5(1) of the Convention, including government replies to questionnaires concerning items on the agenda of the ILC (Article 5(1)(a)); and the submission of instruments adopted by the Conference to the National Assembly (Article 5(1)(b)). Trusting that the Government will make every effort to ensure inclusive participation in the relevant tripartite bodies in the future,the Committee once again requests the Government to provide detailed information on the content and the outcome of tripartite consultations held on each of the matters related to international labour standards covered by Article 5(1) of the Convention.

[ The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 202 5 .]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Article 5(1) of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. In response to the Committee’s previous comments, the Government indicates that, together with the social partners, it is working to expand the application of the Convention within the framework of the Tripartite Council for the Improvement of Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere (“the Tripartite Council”). The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that the prospect of ratifying the Holidays with Pay Convention (Revised), 1970 (No. 132), and the Safety and Health in Mines Convention, 1995 (No. 176), was discussed during the Tripartite Council’s meeting of 14 December 2017. It further notes that the Tripartite Council approved a proposal on cooperation with the International Labour Office (ILO) with regard to the ratification of Conventions Nos 132 and 176, which was sent to the Office in February 2018. The Government indicates that, decision of the Tripartite Council in favour of ratification, the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, in consultation with the social partners, drafted relevant new legislation, which has been submitted to the Council of Ministers of Belarus. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, during the reporting period, tripartite consultations were held with regard to the submission to the competent authorities of the following instruments: the Protocol of 2014 to the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29); the Forced Labour (Supplementary Measures) Recommendation, 2014 (No. 203); the Transition from the Informal to the Formal Economy Recommendation, 2015 (No. 204); and the Employment and Decent Work for Peace and Resilience Recommendation, 2017 (No. 205). Furthermore, the Government indicates that the social partners were consulted with regard to the reports to be submitted to the ILO regarding the application of the following ratified Conventions: the Marking of Weight (Packages Transported by Vessels) Convention, 1929 (No. 27); the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29); the Protection against Accidents (Dockers) Convention (Revised), 1932 (No. 32); the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105); the Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122); Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138); the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182); Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29); the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81); the Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100); the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111); the Human Resources Development Convention, 1975 (No. 142); the Nursing Personnel Convention, 1977 (No. 149); the Right of Association (Agriculture) Convention, 1921 (No. 11); the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87); the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98); the Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144); the Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention, 1978 (No. 151); and the Collective Bargaining Convention, 1981 (No. 154). With regard to national law and practice related to unratified Conventions and Recommendations to which effect has not yet been given, the Government indicates that, during the reporting period, it held consultations with the social partners with regard to the Hours of Work (Industry) Convention, 1919 (No. 1); the Hours of Work (Commerce and Offices) Convention, 1930 (No. 30); the Night Work (Women) Convention (Revised), 1948 (No. 89); the Holidays with Pay Convention (Revised), 1970 (No. 132); the Night Work Convention, 1990 (No. 171); the Part-Time Work Convention, 1994 (No. 175); the Protocol of 1990 to the Night Work (Women) Convention (Revised), 1948 (No. 89); the Reduction of Hours of Work Recommendation, (1962) (No. 116); the Holidays with Pay Recommendation, 1954 (No. 98); the Night Work of Women (Agriculture) Recommendation, 1921 (No. 13); the Weekly Rest (Commerce and Offices) Recommendation, 1957 (No. 103); the Night Work Recommendation, 1990 (No. 178); the Part-Time Work Recommendation, 1994 (No. 182); the Social Protection Floors Recommendation, 2012 (No. 202); the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (Disabled Persons) Convention, 1983 (No. 159); the Home Work Convention, 1996 (No. 177); the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (Disabled Persons) Recommendation, 1983 (No. 168); the Employment Policy (Supplementary Provisions) Recommendation, 1984 (No. 169); the Home Work Recommendation, 1996 (No. 184); the Employment Relationship Recommendation, 2006 (No. 198); and the Transition from the Informal to the Formal Economy Recommendation, 2015 (No. 204). The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide up-to-date information on the content and outcome of tripartite consultations held on all matters concerning international labour standards covered by the Convention, particularly relating to questionnaires on Conference agenda items (Article 5(1)(a)); the submission of instruments adopted by the Conference to the National Assembly (Article 5(1)(b)); the re-examination at appropriate intervals of unratified Conventions and Recommendations to which effect has not yet been given (Article 5(1)(c)); questions arising out of reports to be presented on the application of ratified Conventions (Article 5(1)(d)); and the possible denunciation of ratified Conventions (Article 5(1)(e)). In particular, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on developments with respect to the possible ratification of Conventions Nos 132 and 176.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

Article 5(1) of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. The Government indicates in its report that the tripartite Council for the Improvement of Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere is the major forum for dialogue between the Government and employers’ and worker’s organizations. It also indicates that tripartite consultations on the matters listed in Article 5(1) of the Convention take place regularly through written correspondence. The Committee recalls that consultations through written communications should be undertaken only “where those involved in the consultative procedures are agreed that such communications are appropriate and sufficient” (see General Survey on tripartite consultations, 2000, paragraph 71). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the content and outcome of tripartite consultations held on all matters concerning international labour standards covered by the Convention, particularly relating to questionnaires on Conference agenda items (Article 5(1)(a)); the submission of instruments adopted by the Conference to the National Assembly (Article 5(1)(b)); the re-examination at appropriate intervals of unratified Conventions and Recommendations to which effect has not yet been given (Article 5(1)(c)); questions arising out of reports to be presented on the application of ratified Conventions (Article 5(1)(d)); and the possible denunciation of ratified Conventions (Article 5(1)(e)).

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

Article 5(1) of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee notes the Government’s report received in November 2013 which includes detailed information on consultations held in July 2012 and July 2013 by the tripartite working group established by the National Council for Labour and Social Issues. In reply to the Committee’s previous comments, the Government indicates that a standing committee of the House of Representatives of the National Assembly found that the national legislation was, on the whole, in line with the requirements of the Safety and Health in Mines Convention, 1995 (No. 176). It did not however find sufficient grounds for initiating the ratification process. The Committee notes that representatives of the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, of employers and of workers took part in the meeting held by the tripartite working group in July 2013 during which reports on the application of ratified Conventions was one of the issues addressed. The Committee invites the Government to continue providing information on the content and outcome of the tripartite discussions held on each of the matters concerning international labour standards covered by the Convention.

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

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 2012 direct request, which read as follows:

Repetition

Effective tripartite consultations required by the Convention. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in October 2012. The Government indicates that a number of tripartite consultative bodies operate in Belarus, including the Council for the Improvement of Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere. The Committee notes that the last two meetings of the tripartite working group constituted by the Council were held in November 2011 and April 2012. The Government reports that special attention was paid by the social partners in the tripartite working group to questions directly related to the fulfilment of the recommendations of the Committee. The working group also discussed the question of organizing a tripartite seminar with the participation of the ILO. The Government further reports that a tripartite expert group held a meeting on 4 July 2012 to discuss the preparation of reports on the application of ratified Conventions, and the results of the examination on the usefulness of ratifying the Safety and Health in Mines Convention, 1995 (No. 176). The Committee welcomes the information provided and invites the Government to indicate in its next report, which is due in 2013, information on the tripartite consultations held on each of the matters concerning international labour standards listed in Article 5(1) of the Convention. Please also specify the results of the examination concerning the possible ratification of Convention No. 176 (Article 5(1)(c)).

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Effective tripartite consultations required by the Convention. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in October 2012. The Government indicates that a number of tripartite consultative bodies operate in Belarus, including the Council for the Improvement of Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere. The Committee notes that the last two meetings of the tripartite working group constituted by the Council were held in November 2011 and April 2012. The Government reports that special attention was paid by the social partners in the tripartite working group to questions directly related to the fulfilment of the recommendations of the Committee. The working group also discussed the question of organizing a tripartite seminar with the participation of the ILO. The Government further reports that a tripartite expert group held a meeting on 4 July 2012 to discuss the preparation of reports on the application of ratified Conventions, and the results of the examination on the usefulness of ratifying the Safety and Health in Mines Convention, 1995 (No. 176). The Committee welcomes the information provided and invites the Government to indicate in its next report, which is due in 2013, information on the tripartite consultations held on each of the matters concerning international labour standards listed in Article 5(1) of the Convention. Please also specify the results of the examination concerning the possible ratification of Convention No. 176 (Article 5(1)(c)).

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Articles 1, 2 and 5 of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee notes the Government’s report received in October 2011. The Government indicates that the Council for the Improvement of Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere is the mechanism that allows tripartite consultations on issues arising from the application of international labour standards. A tripartite working group was constituted to discuss the matters raised by the Council. The working group started its work in October 2010 and held four meetings in the first half of 2011. The Committee requests the Government to provide a report containing detailed information on the tripartite consultations held on each of the matters relating to international labour standards covered by Article 5(1), as well as on any recommendation formulated on the matters covered by the Convention.

[The Government is requested to reply in detail to the present comments in 2012.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

Articles 1, 2 and 5 of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. In reply to the Committee’s previous observation, the Government reports on the activities of the National Council on Labour and Social Issues (NCLSI), which has included a representative of the Congress of Democratic Trade Unions since August 2006. The Committee notes that in the meeting held on 21 March 2007, the Group of Experts on the application of the ILO’s international labour standards discussed the instruments adopted by the Conference in 2006 and the prospects of ratification of Convention No. 187. To ensure the effective application of Convention No. 144, as previously referred to by the Committee of Experts, it would welcome further details on the tripartite consultations held on each of the matters relating to international labour standards covered by the Convention. It asks the Government to continue providing information on the meetings of the Group of Experts on the application of the ILO’s international labour standards and on any recommendation formulated on the matters related to international labour standards covered by the Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

1. Effective tripartite consultations. In reply to its 2005 observation, the Government indicates in its report received in October 2006 that the motional Group of Experts on the application of international labour standards of the ILO held a session on 19 May 2006. The session was attended by representatives of the Federation of Trade Unions of Belarus, as well as by a representative of the Belarusian Congress of Democratic Trade Unions (CDTU). The meeting also included representatives of the Ministries of Labour and Social Protection, Justice and Foreign Affairs, as well as of the Confederation of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs. The two items discussed at the meeting were the agenda of the 95th Session of the International Labour Conference and the preparation of reports on the application of ratified Conventions, that is, two of the five matters referred to in Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

2. The Committee recalls that, in its previous comments, it noted the report of the Commission of Inquiry appointed under article 26 of the ILO Constitution to examine the situation of trade union rights in Belarus. The Committee expressed the hope that the important measures that the Government was called upon to adopt in order to respond to the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry would also ensure the effective application of Convention No. 144. In particular, the Committee recalls that the Commission of Inquiry recommended that the CDTU should be allowed to participate through whichever representative it designates in the work of the National Council on Labour and Social Issues.

3. The Committee requests the Government to report on the progress made in the application of Articles 1, 2 and 5 of the Convention to ensure the free choice of workers’ representatives in tripartite consultations on international labour standards. In particular, it requests the Government to report in detail on the measures taken to implement effective tripartite consultation on all the matters relating to international labour standards covered by the Convention and to clarify the manner in which the meetings of the National Council on Labour and Social Issues contribute to the holding of tripartite consultations within the meaning of the Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

1. In its 2004 observation, the Committee noted the report of the Commission of Inquiry appointed under article 26 of the ILO Constitution to examine the situation of trade union rights in Belarus. It expressed the hope that the important measures that the Government was called upon to adopt in order to respond to the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry would also ensure the effective application of Convention No. 144. It requested the Government to report on the progress made, particularly in the application of Articles 1, 2 and 5 of the Convention.

2. The Committee notes the Government’s report on the application of the Convention received in September 2005 which includes an observation formulated by the Belarusian Congress of Democratic Trade Unions (CDTU). It notes the minutes of the meeting held by the tripartite group of experts on the application of ILO Conventions in April and July 2005. In its report, the Government also indicates that the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection assumes responsibility for the administrative support of the group of experts, including sending the invitations to participate in its meetings.

3. Free choice of workers’ representatives. In its communication, the CDTU points out that the Government invited, in July 2005, its representative to the National Council for Labour and Social Issues to participate in the meeting of the tripartite group of experts on the application of ILO Conventions. The CDTU expresses its concerns about the fact that the Government decided unilaterally the appointment of the workers’ representative to the meetings of the group of experts, in violation of Article 3, paragraph 1, of the Convention. The CDTU indicates that it is not for the Government to decide who represents the workers’ organizations in the process of social dialogue. The CDTU urges the Government to restore its elected representative to represent the organization in the National Council for Labour and Social Issues. In this regard, the Committee recalls that Article 3 of the Convention provides that "the representatives of employers and workers for the purposes of the procedures provided for in this Convention shall be freely chosen by their representative organizations". The Committee reminds that the principle of free choice is respected if the organizations themselves appoint their representatives directly (paragraph 44 of the General Survey of 2000 on tripartite consultation). It further recalls that the determination of the most representative organizations must be based on objective, pre-established and precise criteria so as to avoid any possibility of bias or abuse. In addition, the Commission of Inquiry recommended that the CDTU should be allowed to participate through whichever representative it designates to the work of the National Council on Labour and Social Issues. The Committee therefore asks the Government to ensure the free choice of workers’ representatives in the tripartite consultation on international labour standards as required by the Convention and to respond to the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry on this important issue. It again asks the Government to report in detail on the measures taken in order to implement effective tripartite consultation in the sense of the Convention.

[The Government is asked to report in detail to the present comments in 2006.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

1. In response to a direct request formulated in 2001, the Government indicates that the National Council for Labour and Social Issues approved, at its meeting of 4 December 2002, the regulations on the functioning of the tripartite group of experts on the application of ILO Conventions. The Committee also notes that the agenda of the 14 May 2003 meeting of the group of experts included the results of the 286th Session of the ILO Governing Body, the agenda of the 91st Session of the International Labour Conference and the preparation by the Government of reports on ratified Conventions.

2. The Committee noted the report of the Commission of Inquiry appointed under article 26 of the ILO Constitution to examine the situation of trade union rights in Belarus. The Commission of Inquiry considered, inter alia, that restricting social dialogue to one trade union federation, whose independence had been called into question, would not only have the effect of further anchoring a de facto state-controlled trade union monopoly, but would also infringe upon the right of workers to form and join organizations of their own choosing, in accordance with Article 2 of Convention No. 87 (paragraph 630 of the report). It also stated that it believed that social dialogue would be enhanced by further efforts to delineate the boundaries between the Government and the social partners, as well as between workers and enterprise directors (paragraph 631 of the report). The Committee trusts that the important measures that the Government is called upon to adopt in order to respond to the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry will also ensure the effective application of Convention No. 144. It requests the Government to report on the progress made, particularly in the application of Articles 1, 2 and 5 of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

1. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes that no information is provided in the Government’s latest report on the contents of the consultations held with social partners on the questions set out in Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention and that copies or a summary of the minutes produced by the National Council for Labour on these consultations were not received. It again draws the Government’s attention to the need to supply more detailed and concrete information on the consultations held in order to allow it to assess how the Convention is applied in practice. It therefore requests the Government to supply full and detailed information on the contents of the consultations held during the period covered by the next report on the matters set out in Article 5, paragraph 1, including information as to the frequency of such consultations and the results. In this regard, the Committee wishes to draw the Government’s attention to the fact that certain subjects (replies to questionnaires, submissions to the competent authorities, reports to be presented to the ILO) require annual consultations, while others (re-examination of unratified Conventions and Recommendations, proposed denunciation of ratified Conventions) require less frequent examination.

2. Article 4. Please describe any arrangements made for the financing of any necessary training of participants on the consultative procedures.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

The Committee has noted the Government's latest report on application of the Convention. In particular, it has noted the information on the follow-up to the consultations in the National Council for Labour and Social Issues on the ratification of the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155). The Committee notes, however, that the Government merely indicates that consultations are held regularly on the various matters set out in Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention through written communications and in the National Council for Labour. The Committee wishes to draw the Government's attention to the need to supply fuller and more detailed information on the consultations held and to specify the nature of all ensuing reports or recommendations in order to allow the Committee to better assess how the Convention is applied in practice. In this context, the Committee notes that minutes are produced for every meeting of the National Council for Labour. The Government is invited to attach them to its report on the application of the Convention whenever there is a reference to matters relating to ILO activities in regard to the Convention.

Furthermore, the Government is asked once again to specify whether, in conformity with the requirements of Article 4, paragraph 2, arrangements have been made or are envisaged for the financing of any necessary training of participants in the consultative procedures.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee notes the Government's last report and the information contained in response to the Committee's previous direct request. It notes the Government's statement to the effect that consultations have been held within the National Council on Labour and Social Issues relative to the ratification of the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155). The Committee requests the Government to keep the ILO informed of the outcome of these consultations and hopes that it will be in a position to shortly provide detailed information in respect of the consultations held on each of the matters set out in Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention, and to indicate the nature of any reports or recommendations made as a result of the consultations. In this respect, with reference to the Government's statement to the effect that no consultations have taken place on the matters set out in the above Article 5, paragraph 1(a), (b) and (e), the Committee wishes to recall that certain matters referred to (responses to questionnaires, submissions to the competent authorities, reports to be submitted to the ILO) imply annual consultation, whereas others (the re-examination of unratified Conventions and Recommendations, the proposals for the denunciation of ratified Conventions) require less frequent consultation.

Moreover, the Government is asked to specify whether, in conformity with the requirements of Article 4, paragraph 2, arrangements have been made or are envisaged for the financing of any necessary training of participants on the consultative procedures. Finally, the Government is requested to indicate, as required under Article 6, whether consultations have been held with regard to issuing an annual report by the National Council on Labour and Social Issues with regard to its working of the ILO activities and the procedures provided for in the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

The Committee notes the Government's second report. It notes in particular Presidential Decree No. 278 of 15 July 1995 which, amongst other things, established the National Council on Labour and Social Issues. The Committee notes that the membership of the Council is tripartite and that the social partners are represented on an equal footing. It also notes that the attributions of the Council include the formulation of proposals with a view to the ratification of international labour Conventions. The Committee notes the information in the report on the matters discussed in the Council in 1996, and trusts that the Government will shortly be in a position to provide information on consultations addressing the matters listed in paragraph 1 of Article 5 of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

The Committee notes with interest the Government's first report on application of the Convention. The Committee notes that by Decision No. 103 of the Council of Ministers of 25 February 1993, supplemented by Decision No. 452 of 12 July 1993, a national tripartite Conciliation Council has been created, responsible for labour relations. It notes that the nature and form of the procedures in this Council have been laid down so as to allow, inter alia, preparation of proposals with a view to ratifying international labour Conventions. Please supply the text of this decision as well as the information requested in the report form adopted by the Governing Body relating to its operation, specifically with reference to Article 5 of the Convention.