Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Latvia (Ratification: 1992)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

Article 1c) of the Convention. Punishment for breaches of labour discipline. The Committee previously requested the Government to restrict the scope of application of the following provisions of the Criminal Law, which provide for penal sanctions involving compulsory prison labour (by virtue of section 56(1) of the Sentence Execution Code of Latvia) as punishment for breaches of labour discipline:

• –section 197, which provides that the negligent fulfilment of duties by a responsible employee of an undertaking (company) or organization or by a person authorized by an undertaking or organization, if substantial harm has been caused to the undertaking or organization or to the rights and interests protected by law of another person, is punishable by imprisonment or a fine;
• –section 319, which provides that the non-performance or negligent performance of duties by a State official, which he or she must perform in order to prevent damage to the State authority, administrative order or rights and interests protected by law of a person, and if it has caused significant damage to the State authority, administrative order or rights and interests protected by law, is punishable by imprisonment or a fine.

The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that both sections of the Criminal Law have been amended. Section 197, as amended in 2022, eliminates the phrase “to the undertaking or organization, or to the interests protected by law of another person”, and adds community service as an alternative punishment to deprivation of liberty. Likewise, section 319, as amended in 2021, eliminates the phrase “in order to prevent damage to the State authority, administrative order or rights and interests protected by law of a person, and if it has caused significant damage to the State authority, administrative order or rights and interests protected by law”, and adds community service as an alternative punishment to deprivation of liberty. The Government further indicates that community service is defined under section 40 of the Criminal Law as the compulsory participation in indispensable public service which a convicted person serves as punishment by doing work, in the area where he or she resides, as specified by the local government during free time outside regular employment or studies and without remuneration.

The Committee notes that during the period from 1 June 2018 until 20 May 2022, there were no convictions according to section 197, whereas there were six convicted persons under section 319 of the Criminal Law and one of them was sanctioned with imprisonment.

The Committee observes with regret that the amendments to the Penal Code did not take into account the Committee’s previous comments since, instead of limiting the scope of the breaches of labour discipline punishable by sanctions involving compulsory labour, they have broadened that scope. By eliminating the reference to “substantial harm” from the text of section 197, any situation of negligent fulfilment of duties by a responsible employee of an undertaking or organization or by a person authorized by an undertaking or organization could be sanctioned with deprivation of liberty, community work or a fine. Also, by suppressing from the text of section 319 the reference to “substantial damage”, any situation of “non-performance or negligent performance of duties by a State official” becomes an offense punishable with deprivation of liberty, community work or a fine.

The Committee recalls that, according to Article 1(c) of the Convention, no sanction involving compulsory labour (including compulsory prison labour or community service) should be imposed for breaches of labour discipline. It has underlined in this regard that only breaches of labour discipline that impair or are liable to endanger the operation of essential services, or which are committed either in the exercise of functions that are essential to safety or in circumstances where the life or health are in danger are excluded from the scope of the Convention (2012 General Survey on Fundamental Conventions, paragraph 310). 

Therefore, the Committee once again requests the Government to review sections 197 and 319 of the Criminal Law and ensure that both in law and practice no sanctions involving compulsory labour, including in the form of compulsory prison labour or community service, are imposed for breaches of labour discipline that: (i) do not relate to circumstances that endanger the operation of essential services, or (ii) take place in the exercise of functions that are essential to safety or in circumstances where the life or health of persons are endangered. In the meantime, it requests the Government to continue providing information on the application in practice of such provisions.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Penal sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee previously noted that the Criminal Law imposes sanctions of deprivation of liberty (involving compulsory labour pursuant to sections 56-1 and 56-10 of the Code of Execution of Sentences) or community service or a fine for situations covered by the Convention, namely: triggering of national, ethnic and racial hatred (section 78); desecration of State symbols (section 93); incitement of social hatred and enmity (section 150) and defamation (section 157). It requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of the above sections of the Criminal Law.

The Committee notes the Government’s information in its report on the detailed interpretation and application in practice of the abovementioned provisions. Section 78 of the Criminal Law is aimed at punishing acts inciting hatred or enmity against a person or group of persons based on his/her national, ethnic, racial or religious affiliation, while section 150 establishes criminal liability for acts inciting hatred or enmity based on gender, age, disability of a person or any other personal characteristics. The Committee also notes that section 93 of the Criminal Law establishes criminal liability for acts of pulling down, tearing, breaking, destroying or other desecration of the coat of arms or the national flag, or public desecration of the national anthem. The Government indicates that the state symbols reflect the history of independence and the public order in the country. With regard to section 157, it is aimed at punishing acts of knowingly disseminating untrue or defamatory information of another person. Under this section, the criminal proceedings shall be initiated upon the complaint of the person to whom the harm has been inflicted. The Committee observes that certain limitations may be imposed by law on the rights and freedoms concerned, which shall be accepted as normal safeguards against their abuse, examples being laws against incitement to violence, civil strife or racial hatred (see 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 302).

Article 1(c). Penal sanctions applicable to public officials and responsible employees of enterprises or organizations. The Committee previously referred to section 319 of the Criminal Law, which provides that the non-performance or improper performance of duties by a public official as a result of a negligent attitude, causing substantial harm to state interests or to other persons, is punishable, among others, by penalties of deprivation of liberty (which involves compulsory prison labour) or community service. It also referred to section 197 of the Criminal Law, which makes punishable with similar sanctions the improper performance of duties by a responsible employee of an enterprise or organization, as a result of a negligent attitude, if substantial harm has been caused to the enterprise or organization or to the rights and interests of other persons. The Committee also noted that, from 2013 to 2014, two officials who were convicted under section 197 of the Criminal Law were sentenced to community service, and of the four officials convicted under section 319, one of them was sentenced to deprivation of liberty for three years.

The Committee notes the Government’s information that, according to section 23 of the Law on the Procedures for the Entry-into-Force and Application of the Criminal Law, substantial harm refers to: (i) property loss equal to five times the minimum monthly wage and threats to other legal interests; (ii) property loss equal to ten times the minimum monthly wage; or (iii) significant threats to other legal interests. The Government indicates that forced labour is not imposed for the violation of labour discipline. Section 197 of the Criminal Law establishes criminal liability for acts endangering national economic interests, while the objective of section 319 is to protect the normal operation of governmental institutions and the public service. The Committee also notes the Government’s information that, from 2015 to 2017, two persons were convicted and sentenced to community service under section 197 of the Criminal Law; while seven persons were convicted under section 319, of whom two were sentenced to community service and three were sentenced to conditional deprivation of liberty.

The Committee recalls that Article 1(c) of the Convention prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour “as a means of labour discipline”, which covers any measures to ensure the due performance by workers of their service under compulsion of law (in the form of physical constraint or the menace of a penalty), as well as any sanctions involving compulsory labour (including compulsory prison labour and community service). The Committee underlines that only acts which concern the operation of essential services and the exercise of functions which are essential to safety or to circumstances where the life or health of persons are endangered are excluded from the scope of the Convention (see 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraphs 309–311). The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to review these provisions of the Criminal Law with a view to bringing them into conformity with the Convention. Pending such measures, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the application of sections 197 and 319 in practice, indicating in particular the penalties imposed and supplying copies of the relevant court decisions.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Penal sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the violation of the provisions prohibiting the expression of certain political or ideological views under the Law on Meetings, Marches and Demonstrations of 1997 is punishable by a fine or an administrative arrest for a term of up to 15 days, under section 174-3 of the Code of Administrative Offences. It also noted that pursuant to section 319 of the Code of Administrative Offences, persons who are detained in administrative arrest shall be used for physical work, which is to be organized by the relevant local governments. Recalling 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, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on measures taken or envisaged to ensure the observance of the Convention in this regard.

The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication in its report that section 319 of the Code of Administrative Offences has been deleted by amendments of 14 June 2012. Moreover, amendments of 20 February 2014 to the Code of Administrative Offences substituted the sanction of administrative arrest under section 174-3 with a warning or a fine.

The Committee notes, however, that the Criminal Law imposes sanctions of deprivation of liberty (involving compulsory labour pursuant to sections 56-1 and 56-10 of the Code of Execution of Sentences) or community service or a fine for situations covered by the Convention, namely: triggering of national, ethnic and racial hatred (section 78); desecration of State symbols (section 93); incitement of social hatred and enmity (section 150) and defamation (section 157). The Committee recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of compulsory labour or community service as a punishment for peacefully holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It observes that the above penal provisions are worded in terms broad enough to lend themselves to the application as a means of punishment for peacefully expressing political views and, in so far as they are enforceable with sanctions of imprisonment which can involve compulsory labour or community service, they may be incompatible with the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to ensure, both in law and in practice, that no penalties involving compulsory labour or community service may be imposed for the peaceful expression of political views opposed to the established system. In the meantime, it requests the Government to provide information on the application of sections 78, 93, 150 and 157 of the Criminal Law in practice, including copies of court decisions defining or illustrating their scope.

Article 1(c). Penal sanctions applicable to public officials and responsible employees of enterprises or organizations. The Committee previously referred to section 319 of the Criminal Law, which provides that the non-performance or improper performance of duties by a public official as a result of a negligent attitude, causing substantial harm to state interests or to other persons, is punishable, among others, by the penalties of deprivation of freedom (which involves compulsory prison labour) or community service. It also referred to section 197 of the Criminal Law, which makes punishable with similar sanctions the improper performance of duties by a responsible employee of an enterprise or organization, as a result of a negligent attitude, if substantial harm has been caused to the enterprise or organization or to the rights and interests of other persons.

The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government on the application of sections 197 and 319 of the Criminal Law. According to this information, from 2013–14, two officials who were convicted under section 197 of the Criminal Law were sentenced to community service, and of the four officials convicted under section 319, one of them was imposed with deprivation of liberty for three years. The Committee further notes the Government’s statement that amendments to the abovementioned provisions to abandon penalties of community service are not planned. The Committee once again recalls that under Article 1(c) of the Convention, no sanctions involving compulsory prison labour or community service should be imposed for breaches of labour discipline. Only acts which concern the operation of essential services and the exercise of functions which are essential to safety or to circumstances where the life or health of persons are endangered are excluded from the scope of the Convention. Therefore, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to review these provisions of the Criminal Law with a view to bringing them into conformity with the Convention. Pending such measures, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the application of sections 197 and 319 in practice, indicating in particular the penalties imposed and supplying copies of the relevant court decisions.

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

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Penal sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the aw on meetings, marches and demonstrations of 1997 prohibiting the expression of certain political or ideological views. The Government previously indicated that violation of this Law is punishable by a fine or an administrative arrest for a term of up to 15 days, under section 174-3 of the Code of Administrative Offences, which provides for the application of such penalties in case of violation of the prescribed procedures for the organization and conduct of public meetings, processions and pickets.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that section 319 of the Code of Administrative Offences stipulates that persons who are detained in administrative arrest shall be used for physical work, which is to be organized by the relevant local governments. The Committee further notes that no administrative arrests have occurred relating to section 174-3 from January 2009 to June 2011.

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. Referring to the explanations provided in paragraphs 152–166 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, the Committee points out 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. Such views may be expressed orally or through the press or other communications media or through the exercise of the right of association or participation in meetings and gatherings.

In the light of the above considerations, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on measures taken or envisaged to ensure the observance of the Convention in this regard. Pending such measures, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide in its next report, information on the application in practice of section 174-3, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope, so as to enable the Committee to ascertain whether it is applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

Article 1(c). Penal sanctions applicable to public officials and responsible employees of enterprises or organizations. The Committee previously referred to section 319 of the Criminal Law, which provides that the non-performance or improper performance of duties by a public official as a result of a negligent attitude, causing substantial harm to state interests or to other persons, is punishable, among others, by the penalties of deprivation of freedom (which involves compulsory prison labour) or community service. It also referred to section 197 of the Criminal Law, which makes punishable with similar sanctions the improper performance of duties by a responsible employee of an enterprise or organization, as a result of a negligent attitude, if substantial harm has been caused to the enterprise or organization or to the rights and interests of other persons.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that amendments to the abovementioned sections of the Criminal Law to abandon penalties of community service are not planned. The Committee further notes on the basis of the information in the Government’s report that from 1 June 2009 until 1 June 2011, no persons were convicted under section 197 and ten persons were convicted under section 319 of which two were given penalties of community service. In addition, the Committee notes the detailed information provided on the court decisions in question and penalties imposed.

While noting the Government’s explanations and detailed information on the application of sections 197 and 319 of the Criminal Law, the Committee is bound to recall again that Article 1(c) of the Convention prohibits the use of any form of forced or compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour and community service, as a means of labour discipline. Only acts which concern the operation of essential services and the exercise of functions which are essential to safety or to circumstances where the life or health of persons are endangered are excluded from the scope of the Convention. Therefore the Committee expresses the hope that the Government will take the necessary measures to review these provisions of the Criminal Law with a view to bringing them into conformity with the Convention. Pending such measures, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the application of sections 197 and 319 in practice, indicating in particular the penalties imposed and supplying copies of the relevant court decisions.

Communication of texts. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide, with its next report, copies of the full updated texts of the Code on the Execution of Sentences and the Code of Administrative Offences, as well as a copy of the State Probation Service Law, 2003, as amended, and invites the Government to submit the texts in question in their original language.

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

Communication of texts. The Committee again requests the Government to provide, with its next report, copies of the full updated texts of the Code on the Execution of Sentences and the Code of Administrative Offences, as well as a copy of the State Probation Service Law, 2003, as amended. The Committee takes due note of the Government’s indication in the report that theses texts have not been translated into English.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions for expressing political views. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to certain provisions of the Law on Meetings, Marches and Demonstrations of 1997 prohibiting the expression of certain political or ideological views. It has noted the Government’s indication that violation of this Law is punishable by a fine or an administrative arrest for a term of up to 15 days, under section 174-3 of the Code of Administrative Offences, which provides for the application of such penalties in case of violation of the prescribed procedures for the organization and conduct of public meetings, processions and pickets. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication in its report that administrative arrest does not involve the obligation to perform community service. While having noted these indications, the Committee requests the Government to clarify whether the imposition of an administrative arrest may involve the obligation to perform any other forms of compulsory work. Please also continue to supply information on the application of section 174-3 in practice, including the information on the penalties imposed.

The Committee notes the Government’s explanations concerning the application of section 27 of the Law on the Press and Other Media, section 39(1) of the Radio and Television Law, as well as respective provisions of the Code of Administrative Offences and the Criminal Law. It also notes the information concerning the application in practice of the Ombudsman Law, 2006, in relation to the protection of the constitutional right to freedom of expression.

Article 1(c). Penal sanctions applicable to public officials and responsible employees of enterprises or organizations. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 319 of the Criminal Law, which provides that the non-performance or improper performance of duties by a public official as a result of a negligent attitude, causing substantial harm to state interests or to other persons, is punishable, among others, by the penalties of deprivation of freedom (which involves compulsory prison labour) or community service. It also referred to section 197 of the Criminal Law, which makes punishable with similar sanctions the improper performance of duties by a responsible employee of an enterprise or organization, as a result of a negligent attitude, if substantial harm has been caused to the enterprise or organization or to rights and interests of other persons.

The Committee recalls that Article 1(c) of the Convention prohibits the use of any form of forced or compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a means of labour discipline. While noting the Government’s explanations concerning the application of sections 197 and 319, and referring also to paragraphs 175–178 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, the Committee expresses the firm hope that these provisions of the Criminal Law will be reviewed, so as to limit their scope to the exercise of functions which are essential to safety or to circumstances where the life or health of persons are endangered, in order to bring these provisions into conformity with the Convention. Pending such revision, the Committee again requests the Government to provide information on the application of sections 197 and 319 in practice, indicating in particular the penalties imposed and supplying copies of the relevant court decisions.

Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. The Committee has noted that the Maritime Code of 29 May 2003 has repealed Regulations No. 168 concerning the Maritime Code of 16 August 1994.

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

Communication of texts. The Committee has noted the Government’s indications in its 2005 and 2007 reports concerning the amendments made to the Code on the Execution of Sentences in relation to the sentence of community service. It requests the Government to communicate, with its next report, a copy of the full updated text of the Code on the Execution of Sentences, as well as a copy of the State Probation Service Law, as amended. Please also supply a copy of a full updated text of the Code of Administrative Offences, which the Government indicated as annexed to its 2005 report, but in fact has never been received in the ILO.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions for expressing political views. 1. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 10, paragraph 2, of the Law on Meetings, Marches and Demonstrations of 16 January 1997, which prohibits the expression of views concerning proposals of voluntary modification of the Latvian state system or inciting national or racial hatred or propagating fascist or communist ideology. Section 25 of the same Law provides for liability of organizers, leaders and participants of meetings, marches and demonstrations for violation of the Law. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication that violation of the abovementioned Law is punishable by a fine or an administrative arrest for a term of up to 15 days, under section 174-3 of the Code of Administrative Offences. While having noted the Government’s indication in its 2005 report that administrative arrest does not involve and obligation to perform community service, the Committee reiterates its request for information on the application of section 174-3 in practice, including the information on the penalties imposed.

2. The Committee has noted that, under section 27 of the Law on the Press and Other Media, as amended on 17 April 1997, various violations of this Law (such as e.g. dissemination of information injuring human honour and dignity, disclosure of an official or other secret protected by law, dissemination of a mass media without registration, etc.) are punishable in accordance with laws of the Republic of Latvia. It has also noted that various violations of the Radio and Television Law, as amended in 1996–2004, are punishable under the provisions of the Code of Administrative Offences and the Criminal Code (section 39(1) of the Law). The Committee requests the Government to clarify the scope of such liability for violation of the above laws, indicating the relevant administrative and criminal provisions and the penalties which might be imposed. Please also supply sample copies of the relevant court decisions, if available.

3. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication in its report that, in case of violation of the constitutional right to freedom of expression, a person can apply to the National Human Rights Office or to a court. The Committee would appreciate it if the Government would provide information on any proceedings instituted as a consequence of violation of this constitutional right and communicate copies of any court decisions or the National Human Rights Office’s decisions or reports dealing with the subject.

Article 1(c). 4. Penal sanctions applicable to public officials and responsible employees of enterprises or organizations. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 319 of the Penal Code, which provides that the non-performance or improper performance of duties by a public official as a result of a negligent attitude, causing substantial harm to state interests or to other persons, is punishable by deprivation of freedom (which involves compulsory prison labour). It also referred to section 197 of the Penal Code, which makes punishable with similar sanctions the improper performance of duties by a responsible employee of an enterprise or organization, as a result of a negligent attitude, if substantial harm has been caused to the enterprise or organization or to rights and interests of other persons. Referring to paragraphs 175–178 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, the Committee reiterates its hope that the above provisions of the Penal Code will be reviewed, so as to limit their scope to the exercise of functions which are essential to safety or to circumstances where the life or health of persons are endangered, in order to bring these provisions into conformity with the Convention. Pending such revision, the Committee again requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of sections 197 and 319 of the Penal Code, indicating in particular the penalties imposed and supplying copies of the relevant court decisions.

5. Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. The Committee has noted the Maritime Code of 29 May 2003 supplied by the Government with its report. It requests the Government to communicate a copy of Regulations No. 168 concerning the Maritime Code of 16 August 1994, to which the Government referred in its earlier report, as well as any other provisions relating to labour discipline in merchant shipping.

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

The Committee again requests the Government to communicate a copy of legislation governing the execution of penal sentences.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. 1. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 10, paragraph 2, of the Law on meetings, marches and demonstrations, of 16 January 1997, which prohibits the expression of views concerning proposals of voluntary modification of the Latvian state system or inciting national or racial hatred or propagating fascist or communist ideology. Section 25 of the same Law provides for liability of organizers, leaders and participants of meetings, marches and demonstrations for violation of the Law. In its latest report, the Government repeats its previous indication that violation of the abovementioned Law is punishable by a fine or an administrative arrest for a term of up to 15 days, under section 174-3 of the Administrative Code. While noting this indication, the Committee reiterates its request for information on the application of this provision in practice, including the information on the sanctions imposed, and asks the Government to supply a copy of a full updated text of the Administrative Code. Please also clarify whether the sanction of administrative arrest involves an obligation to perform labour.

2. The Committee again requests the Government to supply copies of legislation governing the press and other media, so that the Committee could ascertain their conformity with the Convention.

3. The Committee has noted from the Government’s report that, in case of violation of the constitutional right to freedom of expression, a person can apply to the National Human Rights Office or to a court. The Committee would appreciate it if the Government would provide information on any proceedings instituted as a consequence of violation of this constitutional right and communicate copies of any court decisions or the National Human Rights Office’s decisions or reports dealing with the subject.

Article 1(c). 4. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indications concerning Regulation No. 168 "the Maritime Code", of 16 August 1994, in relation to sanctions applicable to seafarers for various breaches of labour discipline. It again requests the Government to provide a copy of the Maritime Code with its next report.

5. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 319 of the Penal Code, which provides that the non-performance or improper performance of duties by a public official as a result of a negligent attitude, causing substantial harm to state interests or to other persons, is punishable by deprivation of freedom (which involves compulsory prison labour, under article 19 of the Constitutional Law of the Republic of Latvia, 1991). It also referred to section 197 of the Penal Code, which makes punishable with similar sanctions the improper performance of duties by a responsible employee of an enterprise or organization, as a result of a negligent attitude, if substantial harm has been caused to the enterprise or organization or to rights and interests of other persons. Referring to paragraphs 110-116 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, the Committee expressed the hope that the above provisions of the Penal Code will be reviewed, so as to limit their scope to the exercise of functions which are essential to safety or to circumstances where the life or health of persons are endangered, in order to bring these provisions into conformity with the Convention. Pending such revision, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of sections 197 and 319 of the Penal Code, indicating in particular the penalties imposed and including copies of relevant court decisions. As the Government’s latest report contains no such information, the Committee hopes that the Government will not fail to supply the information requested in its next report.

Article 1(d). 6. The Committee previously noted the provisions of sections 23(1) and 24(1) of the Law on strikes, according to which a strike may be declared illegal by a court decision in case of violation of the Law, and section 34, which provides for liability of persons for violation of the Law. The Committee also noted the Government’s indication that provisions of section 41-2 of the Administrative Code make participation in "illegal" strikes punishable with fines. The Committee hopes that the Government will not fail to supply a full updated text of the Administrative Code with its next report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its earlier comments. It requests the Government to supply, with its next report, a copy of legislation governing the execution of penal sentences.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. 1. The Committee previously noted the provisions of section 10, paragraph 2, of the Law on Meetings, Marches and Demonstrations, of 16 January 1997, which prohibits the expression of views concerning proposals of voluntary modification of the Latvian state system or inciting national or racial hatred or propagating fascist or communist ideology. It also noted that, under section 25 of the same Law, organizers, leaders and participants of meetings, marches and demonstrations may be held liable for violation of its provisions. The Government indicates in its report that violation of the abovementioned Law is punishable by a fine or an administrative arrest for a term of up to 15 days, under section 174-3 of the Administrative Code. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of this provision in practice, indicating the sanctions imposed, and to supply a copy of a full updated text of the Administrative Code.

2. The Committee again requests the Government to supply copies of legislation governing the press and other media, so that the Committee could ascertain their conformity with the Convention.

Article 1(c). 3. The Committee notes the provisions of Regulation No. 158 of the Cabinet of Ministers concerning disciplinary punishment of civil servants, of 16 August 1994, supplied by the Government. It also notes the Government’s indications concerning Regulation No. 168 "the Maritime Code", of 16 August 1994, in relation to sanctions applicable to seafarers for various breaches of labour discipline, and requests the Government to provide a copy thereof with its next report.

4. The Committee notes that, under section 319 of the Penal Code, the non-performance or improper performance of duties by a public official as a result of a negligent attitude, causing substantial harm to state interests or to other persons, is punishable by deprivation of freedom (which involves compulsory prison labour, under article 19 of the Constitutional Law of the Republic of Latvia, 1991). It also notes that section 197 of the Penal Code makes punishable with similar sanctions the improper performance of duties by a responsible employee of an enterprise or organization, as a result of a negligent attitude, if substantial harm has been caused to the enterprise or organization or to rights and interests of other persons. The Committee points out, referring to paragraphs 110 to 116 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, that only sanctions relating to breaches of labour discipline that impair or are liable to endanger the operation of essential services or which are committed in the exercise of functions which are essential to safety or in circumstances where life or health are in danger, are not covered by the Convention. The Committee therefore hopes that the above provisions of the Penal Code will be reviewed, so as to limit their scope to the exercise of functions which are essential to safety or to circumstances where the life or health of persons are endangered. Pending such revision, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of sections 197 and 319 of the Penal Code, indicating in particular the penalties imposed there under and including copies of relevant court decisions.

Article 1(d). 5. The Committee previously noted the provisions of sections 23(1) and 24(1) of the Law on Strikes, according to which a strike may be declared illegal by a court decision in case of violation of the Law, and section 34, which provides for liability of persons for violation of the Law. The Government indicates in its report that provisions of section 41-2 of the Administrative Code make participation in "illegal" strikes punishable with fines. The Committee hopes that the Government will supply, with its next report, a copy of these provisions.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report. It would be grateful if the Government would supply, with its next report, full updated texts of the Criminal Code and Correctional Labour Code, as well as additional information on the following points.

Article 1, paragraph (a), of the Convention.  1.  The Committee has noted the provisions of the Constitution, as amended in 1998, concerning the right to express views and ideas and the prohibition of censorship (article 100), freedom of previously announced peaceful meetings and demonstrations (article 103) and the right to form and join associations, political parties and other public organizations (article 102). It has also noted that, under section 37 of the Law on Public Organizations of 1992, the activities of a public organization may be terminated if it propagates the ideas of racism or totalitarianism. Please provide information on sanctions applicable in case of violation of this provision and on any termination of activities of public organizations which took place in practice under this provision.

2.  The Committee notes the provisions of section 10, paragraph 2, of the law on meetings, marches and demonstrations, which prohibits the expression of views concerning proposals of voluntary modification of the Latvian state system or inciting national or racial hatred or propagating fascist or communist ideology. It also notes that, under section 25 of the same law, organizers, leaders and participants of meetings, marches and demonstrations may be held liable for violation of its provisions. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information on the application of these provisions in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their scope and indicating the sanctions imposed.

3.  Please also supply copies of legislation governing the press and other media, so that the Committee could ascertain their conformity with the Convention.

Article 1, paragraph (c).  Please indicate any provisions governing disciplinary measures applicable to civil servants and supply copies thereof. Please also indicate any sanctions applicable to seafarers for various breaches of labour discipline, such as desertion, absence without leave or disobedience, and supply copies of relevant texts.

Article 1, paragraph (d).  The Committee has noted the provisions of sections 23(1) and 24(1) of the law on strikes, according to which a strike may be declared illegal by a court decision in case of violation of the law. Section 34 of the law provides for liability for violation of its provisions. Please clarify the scope of such liability and indicate what sanctions may be applied for participation in strikes declared illegal.

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

The Committee notes with regret that the Government's report contains no reply to previous comments. It hopes that the next report will include copies of the legislation in force in the following fields: the Criminal Code and the Correctional Labour Code; the laws governing the press and assemblies, meetings and demonstrations; any amendments made to the Law on Public Organizations of 15 December 1992; the Law on the Compulsory State Service of the Republic of Latvia of 1991; the Law governing the Civil Service, and any provisions governing labour discipline in merchant shipping; any provisions restricting the right to strike in order to guarantee the operation of necessary services to the public, as referred to in article 26, paragraph 2, of the Constitutional Law.

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

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government. However, the Government's report contains no reply to the Committee's previous comments. The Committee hopes that the next report will include copies of the legislation in force in the following fields: the Criminal Code and the Correctional Code; the laws governing the press and assemblies, meetings and demonstrations; any amendments made to the Law on Public Organizations of 15 December 1992; the Law on the Compulsory State Service of the Republic of Latvia of 1991; the Law governing the Civil Service, and any provisions governing labour discipline in merchant shipping; any provisions restricting the right to strike in order to guarantee the operation of necessary services to the public, as referred to in article 26, paragraph 2, of the Constitutional Law.

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

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:

The Committee notes with interest the information provided by the Government in its first report on the application of the Convention. It would be grateful if the Government would supply, with its next report, copies of the legislation in force in the following fields: the Criminal Code and the Correctional Code; the laws governing the press and assemblies, meetings and demonstrations; any amendments made to the Law on Public Organizations, of 15 December 1992; the Law on the Compulsory State Service of the Republic of Latvia, of 1991; the Law governing the Civil Service, and any provisions governing labour discipline in merchant shipping; any provisions restricting the right to strike in order to guarantee the operation of necessary services to the public, as referred to in article 26, paragraph 2, of the Constitutional Law.

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

The Committee notes with interest the information provided by the Government in its first report on the application of the Convention. It would be grateful if the Government would supply, with its next report, copies of the legislation in force in the following fields: the Criminal Code and the Correctional Code; the laws governing the press and assemblies, meetings and demonstrations; any amendments made to the Law on Public Organizations, of 15 December 1992; the Law on the Compulsory State Service of the Republic of Latvia, of 1991; the Law governing the Civil Service, and any provisions governing labour discipline in merchant shipping; any provisions restricting the right to strike in order to guarantee the operation of necessary services to the public, as referred to in article 26, paragraph 2, of the Constitutional Law.