Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) - Panama (Ratification: 1966)
Protocol of 2014 to the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 - Panama (Ratification: 2016)

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1995, Publication: 82nd ILC session (1995)

A Government representative of Panama recognized that the draft law to repeal and amend various sections of the Administrative Code had been submitted for ten years to the Legislative Assembly for approval without any successful voting. However, the new national Government set up nine months ago was currently endeavouring to harmonize national legislation with the ratified ILO Conventions. Also, with the active participation of legal professionals and the Supreme Court of Justice, revision was going on of existing codification to guarantee due process of law. This would lead to greater guarantees for defence of the accused in the face of standards which dated from 1916, as was the case of the Administrative Code. She considered that the draft bill, which would bring the 79-year-old legislation into harmony with Convention No. 29, would be well accepted in the legislative body. Act No. 112 of 1974 gave the police authorities the power to make summary judgements and to impose sanctions, but now fines could be imposed instead. The situation had, therefore, been improved although not yet to the optimum. It was a part of the modernization of the judicial system in the country to abolish forced labour in accordance with Convention No. 29.

She added that the issue of employment was a great concern for Panama as it was for the ILO. The Government was aware of the need to consider work as a voluntary chosen means of earning one's living and not as a punishment or a penalty. It was for this purpose that the Government had taken action to submit the draft bill in question yet once more to the respective authority - the Ministry of Government and Justice. This had been done on 12 May this year by Note No. DM 263.95, so that it could be submitted to the Legislative Assembly for adoption. She concluded by hoping that the Government would be able to communicate to the ILO that the necessary measures had been taken to eliminate these provisions which should not be part of the national legislation.

The Employers' members recalled with regret that this was a long-standing case, although the substance was clear. They considered that the Committee should urge a rapid change and wondered if it was possible for the Government to provide a time schedule within which modifications to these legislative provisions would be expected.

The Workers' members also noted that no progress had been made for more than ten years. They pointed out that the Committee of Experts' remarks concerned not only the principle but also the practical protection from forced labour. The Government should be firmly urged to take the necessary measures within a certain time-limit and the case should be re-examined perhaps in a year to see the progress made.

The Workers' member of Panama regretted that a long time had passed without improvement and that the solution depended upon the Ministry of Justice and the Legislative Assembly but hoped that the Government would fulfil its obligation under this Convention.

The Employers' member of Panama noted that, after the dismantling of the national army, the police force in Panama was not empowered to impose forced labour on detainees. He, however, agreed to call upon the Government to take legal measures so that both law and practice could be brought into line with the Convention.

The Government representative responded that the adoption of the draft bill would depend upon Parliament and did not dare to give a specific deadline. She, however, emphasized that the Government would do its best and provide follow-up to the adoption of the draft bill.

The Committee took note of the oral information provided by the Government representative and of the discussion which took place in the Committee. It noted with regret that the draft bill to amend the Administrative Code under which police chiefs are empowered as administrative authorities to impose certain sentences, including labour on public works and detention, had not yet been adopted, although the Government had been referring to this bill for more than ten years and in spite of the information supplied at the 1992 International Labour Conference. The Committee urged the Government to bring about a rapid change in law and practice, preferably within a definite time-frame, to fulfil the relevant provisions of Convention No. 29.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1992, Publication: 79th ILC session (1992)

The Government has supplied the following information:

As regards the comments of the Committee of Experts, the Government states that it has sent to the Ministry of Interior and Justice for its consideration, by means of a letter of 24 September 1991, a draft Bill which repeals and amends some articles of the Administrative Code as regards "forced labour" imposed under sentences rendered by administrative tribunals, with a view to making the legislation in conformity with the Convention. This request was further reiterated by means of a letter of 28 May 1992, in which it has been requested to accelerate the measures for the submission of the draft Bill to the Legislative Assembly. The Government enclosed as annexes these letters and the draft Bill.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Recalling that in November 2016 Panama ratified the Protocol of 2014 to the Forced Labour Convention, 1930, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its 2019 report on the measures taken to apply the Convention as supplemented by the Protocol. The Committee also takes note of the supplementary information provided by the Government in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020).

The Committee also notes the observations of the National Confederation of United Independent Unions (CONUSI), received on 28 September 2019, and the Government’s reply to these observations, received on 27 November 2019. It notes that the CONUSI sent supplementary observations on 30 September 2020. The Committee further notes the Government’s response to these observations, received on 7 December 2020. Given that this response was received too late for examination by the Committee at its current meeting, the Committee proposes examining it in due course.

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention and Article 1(1) of the Protocol. Effective measures to combat trafficking in persons.

1. Article 1(2) of the Protocol. Systematic and coordinated action. In its previous comments, the Committee recognized the action taken by the Government to combat trafficking in persons, in particular through the adoption of Act No. 79 of 2011 concerning trafficking in persons and related activities (Anti-Trafficking Act) and its implementing regulations (Executive Decree No. 303 of 2016). It noted in particular the establishment of a coordinated management system to combat trafficking, the setting up of the National Committee against Trafficking in Persons (CNCTDP) and the adoption of the first National Plan to combat trafficking in persons. The Committee asked the Government to continue these efforts and to provide information on the implementation of the National Plan and on measures taken to ensure better identification and protection of victims and suppression of this crime.

The Committee notes that the Government confirms in its report that it is continuing to make efforts to strengthen its anti-trafficking policy, especially as Panama is a country of origin, transit and destination for victims of trafficking for sexual exploitation and forced labour. In this regard, the Committee notes the adoption of the National Action Plan to combat trafficking in persons 2017–2022 (Executive Decree No. 125 of 17 April 2018). As was the case for the previous plan, the actions envisaged cover five strategic areas: prevention, awareness-raising and dissemination; assistance and protection for victims; action to stamp out the crime; international cooperation; and implementation, follow-up and monitoring. The five strategic areas include lines of action with goals to be achieved, management indicators and identification of the entities involved. The Committee also notes that the implementing regulations for the Anti-Trafficking Act provide for the production of an annual report by the CNCTDP secretariat on progress made on the implementation of the Plan.

The Committee notes that in its observations the CONUSI recognizes the initiatives and action taken by the Government to combat trafficking, but considers that the Government has not provided specific information on the results achieved.

The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on the action taken by the National Committee against Trafficking in Persons to ensure systematic and coordinated action by all entities involved in the implementation of the National Action Plan to combat trafficking in persons 2017–2022. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the results achieved in the context of the Plan, on evaluation reports drawn up by the National Committee and on measures taken or envisaged to overcome any obstacles identified with regard to the adoption of a new plan. Lastly, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the manner in which employers’ and workers’ organizations are consulted regarding the implementation of the plan, its evaluation and the preparation of a new plan.

2. Article 2 of the Protocol. Prevention. Clauses (a) and (b). Awareness-raising and data. The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government on the many awareness-raising campaigns undertaken and on institutional capacity-building training courses. The Government also indicates that, for statistical purposes, the forum on trafficking in persons has proposed the setting up of a system to enable better coordination of the actors involved in the prevention and suppression of trafficking in persons in order to reinforce the methodology used in procedures for recording, gathering and processing statistical data in this field. The Committee observes that under the heading of coordination and exchange of statistical information among the authorities concerned, the National Plan provides for the setting up of an integrated system of statistics on trafficking in persons. The National Plan also provides for the “mapping” of victims and their profiles and of trafficking routes and their modus operandi. In view of the importance of having reliable data on the characteristics and extent of trafficking in order to ensure the best formulation of policies, the Committee hopes that the Government will be able to provide information on the setting up of an integrated system of statistics on trafficking in persons and “mapping” of victims and, if applicable, to forward the data collected.

Clause (c). Reinforcement of inspection services. The Committee notes that the National Plan provides for the implementation of joint inspections, involving officials from the Ministry of Labour, the National Migration Service and security services, in order to detect situations of trafficking for labour exploitation. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the measures taken to strengthen the capacities of the inspection services for the prevention and detection of cases of trafficking in persons for labour exploitation, and also on joint labour inspections conducted for this purpose, as provided for in the National Plan.

Clause (d). Protection of migrant workers during the recruitment process. The Committee notes that the CONUSI refers in its observations to the situation of many migrant workers whose migration status is not regularized and who do not have a work permit. They are not covered by the guarantees contained in the labour legislation and many are trapped in situations amounting to forced labour in prostitution and in the informal or formal economy. The CONUSI also indicates that no data are available on penalties imposed on those who employ workers who do not have work permits. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken to monitor the recruitment process and conditions of employment of migrant workers in order to protect them from these abuses and from situations amounting to forced labour.

Clause (e). Support for due diligence by enterprises. The Committee observes that the National Plan provides, under the strategic component of prevention, for the creation of a strategic alliance with employers and industry so that these can engage in preventing and combating trafficking in persons for labour exploitation. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the implementation of this alliance and in particular on agreements signed with private employers and industry on activities undertaken, as provided for in the National Plan.

3. Article 3 of the Protocol. Identification and protection of victims. The Committee notes the setting up in 2017 of the Victim Assistance and Identification Unit (UIA), whose functions include determining the status of trafficking victims in cases reported to it and carrying out emergency interventions to ensure protection and assistance for victims. In 2018, it registered 54 potential victims of trafficking, of whom 17 were confirmed (definitive identification). Between August 2019 and September 2020, 55 victims were received and assistance provided to 46 of them. The victims originated largely from Colombia and Venezuela. Moreover, the Government indicates that in January 2019 the Action Protocol for the detection, identification, assistance and protection of trafficking victims was adopted. This is a technical tool which establishes guidelines for promoting coordination of the different institutions involved in victim identification and assistance. With regard to victim protection measures, the Government indicates that these involve three phases (the recovery phase covering the first 90 days, the immediate intervention plan, and the integration phase) and that a technical evaluation team, composed of social workers and psychologists, was established in January 2019 to identify the measures to be adopted during these phases. Furthermore, a new plot of land is due to be allocated in the near future for the construction of the first temporary reception centre for trafficking victims, as provided for in the National Plan. Lastly, the Committee notes that Decree No. 7 of 8 January 2019 and Decree No. 21 of 28 May 2019 enable persons identified as victims to benefit from a humanitarian temporary protection permit which is valid for one year and can be extended for up to six years. This permit qualifies them for a temporary work permit (in November 2019, nine individuals received a humanitarian temporary permit). The Committee requests the Government to continue providing detailed information on the number and characteristics of persons identified as trafficking victims, for either sexual or labour exploitation, and also on the nature of the protection granted to them (medical and psychological assistance, legal assistance, granting of a residence and work permit, rehabilitation programmes, etc.). The Committee also requests the Government to indicate the measures taken with a view to the construction of the temporary reception centre for trafficking victims.

4. Article 4 of the Protocol. Access to remedies and compensation. The Committee recalls that the 2011 Act, in addition to providing for free legal assistance and legal representation, stipulates that courts that issue convictions for trafficking offences must also order compensation for victims (sections 38 ff.). The return of victims to their countries of origin or their absence during legal proceedings will not affect their right to receive compensation. The CNCTDP, which is responsible for providing this legal assistance, must establish an assistance fund for trafficking victims and must set aside 25 per cent of its budget for this purpose. The Government explains that, in view of the vulnerable situation of trafficking victims, the latter benefit from the public advocate service. It is for the victims to decide, on the basis of the information provided by this service, whether or not to appear as plaintiffs in court proceedings. In fact, all trafficking victims have benefited from the victim advocacy services of the judiciary. As regards the victim assistance fund, the Government states that the fund administration unit has conducted an examination of court decisions that have ordered the confiscation and seizure of assets deriving from trafficking crimes in order to provide resources for the fund. Finally, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that, for the first time, a court in September 2020, when handing down a conviction for the crime of trafficking in persons for labour exploitation, ordered the compensation of the victim for the damages suffered.

The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on cases in which courts have ordered compensation for victims and on measures adopted to enforce these penalties. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to encourage victims to assert their rights, including the right to compensation, and to file complaints against the perpetrators under the criminal prosecution system. The Committee further asks the Government to indicate how victims who do not file complaints or who return to their countries receive compensation.

5. Article 25 of the Convention and Article 1(1) of the Protocol. Penalties. In reply to the Committee’s previous comments on the functioning of the system to prosecute crimes of trafficking in persons, the Government indicates that between 2014 and 2018 over 250 victims were released, 22 networks were dismantled, 75 individuals underwent court proceedings and 18 were convicted. In 2018, of the eight court decisions handed down, all were concerned with cases of trafficking in persons for sexual exploitation. In 2019, of the ten court rulings, eight included convictions and one of them issued the most severe sentence ever imposed, namely 25 years imprisonment. The Government adds that at the end of 2019 the judicial authorities prepared the Protocol on judicial action in relation to trafficking in persons. The Protocol sets out the procedures and phases through which all officials in the justice system can implement the procedures effectively for the investigation of this crime. The Committee requests the Government to continue carrying out awareness-raising and training activities for prosecution entities and other competent bodies to ensure the detection and suppression of trafficking practices for both sexual and labour exploitation. The Committee also requests the Government to continue providing information on court proceedings initiated in trafficking cases, on court decisions handed down and the penalties imposed and also on procedures for confiscating and seizing the assets of perpetrators.

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

The Committee notes the observations of the National Confederation of United Independent Unions (CONUSI) dated 1 September 2016 and also the Government’s report.

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. Trafficking in persons. The Committee previously noted the strengthening of the legislative and institutional framework for combating the trafficking of persons through the adoption of Act No. 79 of 2011 against trafficking in persons and related activities and the setting up of the National Committee against Trafficking in Persons (CNTP). It asked the Government to continue taking steps to implement the five strategic components of the 2012–17 National Plan against Trafficking in Persons, namely: prevention, protection of victims, prosecution of offenders, cooperation and monitoring.

The Committee notes the detailed information sent by the Government in its last report on the implementation of the National Plan and on the adoption on 6 September 2016 of the regulations implementing Act No. 79 (Executive Decree No. 303). It describes in particular: the numerous activities for providing information and raising awareness of action to combat trafficking in persons (the “Blue Heart” campaign against trafficking in persons, the “One month against trafficking in persons” campaign, conferences, workshops, human chains, radio and TV programmes); the increase in the number of training courses relating to trafficking in persons provided for officials in the judiciary and police, in migration, health and education services, and in the regional executive authorities (Gobernaciones); the establishment of specialist anti-trafficking units at the Public Prosecutor’s Office and in the Judicial Investigation Department of the National Police; the construction of special interview rooms which preserve the anonymity, dignity and physical integrity of victims (Cámara Gesell); and the establishment of a telephone helpline for receiving complaints.

With regard to the protection of trafficking victims, the Committee notes that the regulations implementing the Act provide for the establishment of a “victim identification and assistance unit”, which is to draw up a protocol of procedures for identifying, detecting, assisting and protecting victims, and also a “victim fund administration unit”. The Government also explains that administrative formalities are under way for the construction of a victim reception centre in the province of Panamá Oeste (West Panama), which will be equipped with a multi disciplinary team and cater for 30 persons.

With regard to the prosecution of trafficking, the Committee notes that, according to the statistical information supplied by the Government, the Judicial Investigation Department of the National Police carried out more than 15 operations in conjunction with the Public Prosecutor’s Office in 2015 and 2016. These operations resulted in the dismantling of 13 international criminal networks and the release of over 150 victims of trafficking for labour and sexual exploitation. Most of the victims originated from the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Honduras and Nicaragua. The Government also supplies information on 15 cases which were investigated by the Public Prosecutor’s Office between April 2015 and March 2016 and referred to the courts. Four of these cases resulted in convictions for trafficking in persons with prison sentences of ten to 18 years. The Committee notes that CONUSI emphasizes in its observations that the vast majority of victims prefer to return to their countries without filing any complaints, for fear of reprisals or lack of confidence that the justice process will be rapid and effective, despite the victim protection that is provided for under Act No. 79 of 2011.

The Committee notes all the measures taken by the Government and requests it to continue strengthening its national policy on action against trafficking in persons. It requests it to continue providing information on the following points:

• – the evaluation by the National Committee against Trafficking in Persons (CNTP) of the implementation of the five strategic components of the 2012–17 National Plan against Trafficking in Persons, indicating any obstacles identified and measures contemplated to overcome them, and providing a copy of annual reports published by the CNTP. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on any new national plan that has been adopted;
• – the measures taken to enhance identification, assistance and protection in relation to victims, indicating whether the reception centre for trafficking victims in Panamá Oeste has been established, the number of victims catered for and the measures for their protection and assistance. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate whether the “victim identification and assistance unit” has been established and whether the protocol of procedures for identifying and assisting victims has been drawn up. In this regard, the Committee requests the Government to indicate how victims secure from the competent authorities the full observance of rights deriving from their employment (payment of wage arrears, social protection, etc.) and also compensation for any other harm suffered; and
• – the number of investigations opened and judicial proceedings instituted and the nature of penalties imposed under section 456-A of the Penal Code (added by Act No. 79 of 2011), which criminalizes trafficking in persons.

Welcoming Panama’s ratification on 7 September 2016 of the Protocol of 2014 to the Forced Labour Convention, 1930, the Committee hopes that the Government’s next report on the application of the Convention, which is due in 2019, will contain detailed information on the implementation of each Article of the Protocol.

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

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. Trafficking in persons. In its previous comments, the Committee took note of the measures taken by the Government to combat trafficking in persons, and in particular the adoption of the Act against Trafficking in Persons and Related Activities (No. 79 of 2011). The Act strengthened the legislative framework by giving a broader definition of the offence of trafficking which includes both trafficking for sexual exploitation and trafficking for labour exploitation, and by including in the Penal Code provisions criminalizing a number of offences related to trafficking and punishing other forms of exploitation such as forced labour and slavery.

The Committee notes from the information in the Government’s latest report that it has continued to take measures to strengthen the institutional framework for combating trafficking in persons by setting up a National Committee against Trafficking in Persons (CNTP), which has adopted the National Plan against Trafficking in Persons covering the period 2012–17 (approved by a Presidential Decree of 2 July 2012). The plan serves as a model for action focused on five fundamental strategic pillars: prevention; protection of victims; prosecution and punishment of offenders; national and international cooperation; and monitoring and follow-up of the plan’s implementation. For each pillar, objectives, results and indicators are fixed and the bodies in charge designated. The Government also indicates that since the entry into force of Act No. 79 of 2011, 15 investigations have been opened, mostly for trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation. The Government refers to the difficulties encountered by the authorities in recording offences which stem from the fact that victims are unaware of their status as victims, that there is not any adequate victim protection programmes, and that their first statements are not sufficient to prove the elements of the crime. The Government states that it is taking measures to secure better coordination between first responders, and that Panama aspires to becoming a zero tolerance country as regards trafficking in persons and is therefore intent on putting in place comprehensive measures to address this offence.

The Committee notes this information and encourages the Government to pursue its policy of zero tolerance towards the scourge of trafficking in persons. It requests the Government to continue to take the necessary steps to implement the five strategic pillars of the National Plan against Trafficking in Persons, and to provide information on the evaluation of the implementation of the plan and the achievement of its objectives, to be carried out by the National Committee against Trafficking in Persons. Lastly, recalling that it is essential to punish persons found guilty of this criminal offence, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to strengthen law enforcement bodies, so as to overcome the obstacles to identifying instances of trafficking in persons and thus ensure adequate protection of the victims. Please indicate the number of investigations opened, the judicial proceedings brought and the penalties imposed under Act No. 79 of 2011.

Articles 1(1) and 2(1). Obligation to perform overtime work. The Committee previously noted the detailed information sent by the Government in reply to the concerns expressed by the National Federation of Public Employees and Public Service Enterprise Workers (FENASEP) about the inadequate regulation of overtime work in the public sector. In its latest report, the Government states that the committee to monitor the tripartite agreement signed in February 2012 under the ILO’s auspices has a tripartite subcommittee that examines the consistency of standards governing the public service with ILO Conventions, and that this body will study the matter of overtime. The Committee notes this information and refers the Government to its comments under the Hours of Work (Commerce and Offices) Convention, 1930 (No. 30), which address the subject of overtime in the public sector.

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

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report. It also notes the communications received on 28 August 2011 from the National Federation of Public Employees and Public Service Enterprise Workers (FENASEP), and on 14 August 2011 from the General Confederation of Workers of Panama (CGTP), which contain observations on the application of the Convention by Panama. The Committee notes the Government’s reply to these observations.

As regards the points previously raised concerning the alternative sanction of community work, the Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government on the application in practice of sections 65 to 67 and 57 of the Penal Code.

Article 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. Trafficking in persons. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the measures taken to combat trafficking in persons and to reinforce its legal framework especially as regards trafficking for labour exploitation. It notes with interest the adoption of a new Law against Trafficking in Persons and Related Activities (No. 79 of 2011), which strengthens the national policy against trafficking and provides for a comprehensive coverage of the issue, including the establishment of a national action plan to combat trafficking in persons and several measures to protect and reintegrate victims. The new Law also expands the definition of the crime of trafficking to include trafficking for labour exploitation and incorporates a new chapter in the Penal Code which addresses several criminal activities related to trafficking and sanctions other forms of exploitation, such as forced labour and slavery.

The Committee also notes the detailed information (including statistical data, court decisions and a report prepared by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for the Regional Conference on Migration) provided in the Government’s report as regards other measures it has been taking to address the issue of trafficking in persons in the last few years.

Noting the above information which demonstrates the Government’s efforts to combat trafficking, the Committee hopes that a national action plan will be established as part of the comprehensive national policy against trafficking referred to by the Government and that it will provide information on the application in practice of the new Law against Trafficking in Persons and Related Activities. Please also provide information on any judicial proceedings initiated under the new Law. Finally, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken to combat trafficking in persons for both sexual and labour exploitation, as well as information on any difficulties encountered by the competent authorities in identifying victims and in initiating legal proceedings.

Obligation to perform overtime work. In its communication, the FENASEP expresses concern about the absence of provisions regulating overtime work and adequate compensation in the public sector in Panama. According to the FENASEP, this gap in the legal system allowed administrative authorities to impose overtime in the public sector, with no limits and no adequate compensation. The Committee notes that, in its reply to these observations, the Government provides detailed information on the normative provisions regulating overtime work in the public sector.

The Committee recalls, referring also to paragraphs 132–134 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour, that the imposition of overtime does not affect the application of the forced labour Convention as long as it is within the legal limits. However, above these limits and in cases in which overtime is imposed by exploiting the worker’s vulnerability, under the menace of a penalty, dismissal or payment of wages below the minimum level, such exploitation ceases to be merely a matter of poor working conditions of employment and calls for the protection of this Convention. The Committee hopes that the Government will continue to reinforce the legal protection as regards the use of overtime in the public sector, thereby guaranteeing that any risk of a forced labour situation is averted. It also refers in this connection to its comments addressed to the Government under the Hours of Work (Commerce and Offices) Convention, 1930 (No. 30).

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

Articles 1 (paragraph 1), 2 (paragraph 1), and 25, of the Convention. Trafficking in persons. The Committee notes that the Penal Code of 2007, as amended by Law No. 26 of 21 May 2008, contains provisions punishing sexual exploitation and trafficking in persons for the purpose of sexual exploitation. Thus, section 178 provides for penalties of imprisonment for a term of four to six years for any person who facilitates, encourages, recruits or organizes the entry into or the exit from the country of another person, or the internal movement by that person within the national territory, with a view to submitting that person to prohibited sexual activities or sexual slavery. The Committee also notes other provisions of the Penal Code punishing other crimes related to trafficking in persons, such as association of persons with a view to committing human trafficking (section 325); receiving, depositing, negotiating, transferring or exchanging money, titles, goods or other financial resources resulting from the activities related to trafficking of migrants, human trafficking or commercial sexual exploitation, with the aim of concealing the illicit origin of such resources (section 250); or obtaining, retaining or destructing passports or other identity documents of workers (section 155). While noting these provisions, the Committee observes that the national legislation does not seem to contain provisions punishing trafficking in persons for the purpose of exploitation of their labour and consequently requests the Government to provide information on this point. It also asks the Government to communicate detailed information on the measures taken in order to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons both for sexual exploitation and for exploitation of their labour. Please state whether any legal proceedings have been instituted against perpetrators, indicating the penalties imposed and communicating copies of the relevant court decisions. Please also indicate the difficulties encountered by the competent public bodies in this field.

Article 2, paragraph 2, subparagraph (c). Work exacted as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law. The Committee notes that the 2007 Penal Code provides, among the alternative penalties, for the penalty of community work. Sections 65 to 67 lay down the conditions for the execution of that penalty and stipulate that the persons concerned must give their consent in writing; that the work must be carried out in public entities, in the public health or educational institutions, in associations or in the event of calamity; and that the judge responsible for the execution of penalties shall monitor the performance of such work. The Committee asks the Government to indicate, in its next report, the institutions in which convicted persons may serve this kind of penalty and the type of work performed.

The Committee also notes that section 57 of the Penal Code (included in the chapter governing the execution of principal penalties) allows the judge responsible for the execution of penalties to authorize, as an alternative measure to imprisonment, the voluntary participation of a convicted person in a study programme or work programme to be performed inside or outside of a penitentiary establishment. The Committee notes that “non-remunerated community work” is mentioned among other activities listed in this section. The Committee asks the Government to indicate whether this kind of work is subject to the same conditions as community work provided for in section 65 of the Penal Code. If it is not the case, please indicate the institutions for which this work may be carried out and give the examples of the types of work performed.

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

1. With reference to its previous comments requesting the Government to ensure that seafarers have the right to terminate the labour relationship by giving reasonable notice, the Committee notes with satisfaction section 48(c) of Legislative Decree No. 8 of 26 February 1998, which regulates work at sea and on waterways and lays down other provisions. Under the said section 48(c), the engagement contract concluded per voyage, for a specific or indefinite period, shall be rescinded in cases of denunciation by the crew member provided that this does not imply waiver of rights and is done in writing in front of the labour or consular authority or, failing that, before two witnesses who are members of the vessel's crew.

2. Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention. In previous comments, the Committee referred to various sections of the Administrative Code, of Act No. 27 of 1927 (which supplements the Administrative Code), and of Act No. 112 of 1974, which empower various non-judicial authorities to impose administrative sentences including compulsory labour. The Committee noted with interest Act No. 21 of 22 April 1998, which repeals, inter alia, sections 878(1) and 882 of the Administrative Code which provided for sentences of labour on public works, and section 887 of the Code which laid down that persons sentenced to imprisonment who were maintained with public monies would be compelled to labour on public works.

The Committee further notes with interest the Government's statement in its report that it is thus ensured that non-judicial authorities cannot impose penalties involving compulsory labour.

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

1. Article 1(1) and Articles 2(1) and (2)(c) of the Convention. The Committee refers to its previous observations and the discussion in the Conference Committee in 1995 regarding sections 873, 878, 882, 884 and 887 of the Administrative Code and Act No. 112 of 1974. Those provisions empowered police chiefs to impose administrative sentences, including labour on public works and detention, contrary to the Convention. The Committee now notes with interest that Act No. 21 of 22 April 1998 has repealed the offending provisions of sections 878, 882 and 887 of the Code with the intention of bringing it into conformity with the Convention. It would be grateful if the Government would indicate whether, in law and in practice, these repeals have the effect of ensuring that no work or service may be exacted by virtue of the administrative powers still exercised by police chiefs, or by the President, governors or mayors.

2. Article 2(1). The Committee refers to its observation under Convention No. 105, concerning the use of forced or compulsory labour as a means of labour discipline for seafarers. It recalls the requirements also of the present Convention as regards the right of workers to free choice of employment and thus the right to terminate their employment. In its General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour, paragraphs 67 to 73, the Committee explained in particular on paragraph 69 the position relating to seafarers, who should be allowed upon giving reasonable notice to put an end to even indefinite contracts of employment without having to show any particular reason. The Committee hopes that the revision of the Maritime Labour Bill to which the Government has referred will take full account of the present Convention.

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

The Committee refers to its observation.

In its previous direct request, the Committee noted that sections 827 and 828 of the Administrative Code and sections 2, 3 and 4 of Act No. 27 of 1927 (supplementing the Administrative Code) empower the President, governors and local mayors, as well as employees in national jurisdictions, to impose sentences of detention. It requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that non-judicial authorities cannot impose sentences involving compulsory labour.

The Government has provided no information on this point in its report. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would confirm its understanding that, if the amendments proposed in Bill No. 22 are adopted, these provisions would no longer have the effect of allowing administrative imposition of sentences involving compulsory labour.

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

The Committee recalls that under provisions of the Administrative Code (sections 873, 878, 882, 884 and 887) and Act No. 112 of 1974, police chiefs are empowered as administrative authorities to impose sentences, including labour on public works and detention. As has been pointed out on many occasions, this is not in accordance with Article 2, paragraph 2(c) of the Convention, under which work can be exacted only as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law, so that the imposition of compulsory labour by administrative authorities is not compatible with the Convention.

The question was discussed in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in 1995, and that Committee noted with regret that the draft had not been adopted, though the Government had been referring to draft legislation before the Legislative Assembly for more than ten years.

In its report received in May 1997, the Government has once again indicated that legislation for this purpose is still pending. It states that the Executive Authority, in a session of the Cabinet Council (Consejo de Gabinete) on 26 May 1997, approved Bill No. 22 to repeal and amend certain provisions of the Administrative Code in order to bring it into line with Convention No. 29; and that the Bill has now been submitted to the Legislative Assembly for final approval.

The Committee once again expresses the hope that the legislation will be adopted in the near future, in order to bring this legislation into line with the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

Freedom of workers in the service of the State to leave their employment

The Committee noted the provisions of the Administrative Code, Book II, which are applicable to public employees. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the concepts of "compulsory office" (destino obligatorio) and/or "compulsory acceptance" (forzosa aceptación).

The Committee also notes that sections 827 and 828 of the Administrative Code and sections 2, 3 and 4 of Act No. 27 of 1927 (supplementing the Administrative Code) empower the President, governors and local mayors, as well as employees in national jurisdictions, to impose sentences of detention. The Committee refers to the comments that it has made on this matter in its observation and requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that non-judicial authorities cannot impose sentences involving compulsory labour.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

The Committee notes that the draft Bill, to which the Government has been referring for over ten years, to repeal and amend the provisions of the Administrative Code (sections 873, 878, 882, 884 and 887) and Act No. 112 of 1974, under which police chiefs are empowered as administrative authorities to impose sentences, including labour on public works and detention, has not yet been adopted.

In accordance with Article 2, paragraph 2(c), of the Convention, work can only be exacted as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law; the imposition of compulsory labour by administrative authorities is not therefore compatible with the Convention.

The Committee hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures without delay to ensure that the provisions of the Convention on this point are respected.

[The Government is asked to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 82nd Session.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

Freedom of workers in the service of the State to leave their employment

The Committee asked the Government to provide the text of the rules applying to career servicemen, concerning their freedom to leave their employment, in peace time, on their own initiative.

The Committee notes that, by virtue of Cabinet Decree No. 38 of 10 February 1990, the "Public Force of the State of Panama" has been established to replace the national army, and that it is in the process of being organised.

The Committee notes that the provisions of the Administrative Code, Book II, Title VI, Chapter V, sections 807 to 823 applying to public employees, currently apply to the employees of the above Public Force. The Committee requests the Government to provide a copy of the whole of Book II of the Administrative Code so that it can ascertain the meaning of "compulsory office" ("destino obligatorio") (sections 811 and 816) and/or office subject to "compulsory acceptance" ("de forzosa aceptación") (section 817).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

The Committee has been referring for several years to section 873 of the Administrative Code, under which chiefs of police, as administrative authorities, can impose the penalties listed in section 878, including labour on public works and detention, which are provided for in sections 882 and 884 respectively of the Code.

With regard to detention, section 887 of the Administrative Code provides that those sentenced to detention and living on public funds shall be required to work on public works as many hours per day as the chief of police considers reasonable, subject to a maximum of eight, to compensate the treasury for the value of the rations furnished, and that in this case each day of labour on public works shall count as two days of detention. The Committee has also referred to sections 1708 to 1720 of the Administrative Code relating to police court proceedings.

With regard to section 878 of the Administrative Code, the Committee notes that, according to the Government's report, the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare has prepared a preliminary draft of a Bill to repeal section 878(1) and sections 882 and 887 of the Administrative Code and to amend sections 892 and 1715 of the same Code. The Committee also notes that its comments also refer to section 878(3).

The Committee has also referred to Act No. 112 of 1974, sections 1 to 3 of which empower the administrative authorities to impose sentences of detention for certain offences listed in section 2 of this Act.

The Committee notes from the Government's report that the above Act is still in force. The Committee asks the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that, in accordance with the Convention, compulsory labour cannot be imposed by administrative authorities or other non-judicial bodies.

Since the above matters have been the subject of its comments for many years, the Committee hopes that the draft Bill will be adopted as rapidly as possible and that the Government will provide a copy of it as soon as it has been adopted.

The Committee asks the Government to indicate whether other provisions of the Administrative Code empower non-judicial bodies to impose penalties involving compulsory labour.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

Freedom of workers in the service of the State to leave their employment

The Committee takes note of the information provided by the Government, concerning the period of compulsory service that may be required of a public servant who has been granted a study leave.

The Committee asks the Government to supply the text of the rules applying to career servicemen, concerning their freedom to leave their employment, in peacetime, on their own initiative.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

The Committee has for some years been referring to section 873 of the Administrative Code, under which chiefs of police, as administrative authorities, can impose the penalties listed in section 878, including labour on public works and detention, which are provided for in sections 882 and 884 respectively of the Code.

With regard to detention, section 887 of the Administrative Code provides that those sentenced to detention and living on public funds shall be required to work on public works as many hours per day as the chief of police considers reasonable, subject to a maximum of eight, to compensate the treasury for the value of the rations furnished, and that in this case each day of labour on public works shall count as two days as detention. The Committee has also referred to sections 1708 to 1720 of the Administrative Code, relating to police court proceedings.

The Committee has also referred to Act No. 112 of 1974, sections 1 to 3 of which empower the administrative authorities to impose sentences of detention for certain offences listed in section 2 of this Act.

In 1984 the Committee took note of Bill No. 25, furnished by the Government, which was intended to introduce the necessary provisions to give effect to the Convention. In 1987, it noted that this Bill had not been approved by the authorities and that the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare was therefore considering the possibility of preparing another Bill, taking into consideration the observations of the Committee of Experts.The Committee notes from the information provided by the Government in its last report, that the above Bill has not yet been drafted but that the possibility of such a draft is still under consideration.

The Committee again points out, as it does in paragraphs 94 to 96 of its General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour, that "compulsory labour imposed by administrative or other non-judicial bodies or authorities is not compatible with the Convention". Furthermore, the possibility of appeal to a higher authority is not enough to ensure the observance of the Convention on this point.

Since this matter has been the subject of comments for more than ten years, the Committee hopes that the legislation will be brought into conformity with the Convention as rapidly as possible.