Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) - Iran (Islamic Republic of) (Ratification: 1957)

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1987, Publication: 73rd ILC session (1987)

A Government representative said the latest comments of the Committee of Experts had just been received by his country. The question was again under consideration and it was hoped to communicate in the near future the conclusions of the inspections carried out, as well as the new reports containing the Government's comments on the application of the Convention.

The Employers' members recalled that the Committee of Experts has pointed out that, under the law adopted in 1980, a law imposing forced labour had been repealed, thus bringing legislation on compulsory national service into conformity with the Convention. If the Committee of Experts could confirm this through examination of the text in question, then this matter could be considered as resolved. In the second part of its observation, the Committee of Experts had requested that measures be taken to amend certain provisions of the Penal Code, whereby people could be compelled to take up employment on pain of receiving prison sentences. They noted that the Government had referred to a constitutional provision which prohibited forced labour, and had stressed that the legislation in question was only applied to people who violated public order. Nevertheless, to give effect to the Convention, the legislation should be expressly limited to this exception. As the Government representative had apparently indicated, a draft law on this matter was envisaged and would be forwarded to the Office. Once the Committee of Experts had examined this draft, it could be seen next year whether the draft complied with the requirements of the Convention. They hoped that forced labour would be eradicated in the near future.

The Workers' members expressed their satisfaction that the problems relating to the health, literacy and development corps, appeared to have been resolved. They hoped that this would be the case in practice. The second issue raised by the Committee of Experts referred to provisions which were not in conformity with the Convention. This involved the Penal Code provision under which any person who did not have definite means of subsistence and who, whether through laziness or through negligence, did not look for work might be obliged by the Government to take suitable employment. If the person refused to do this, he or she was liable to imprisonment or whipping. This matter had been discussed in the present Committee on several occasions, and the Committee of Experts had been making comments since 1975. That was why they hoped that, as had been promised, the draft law amending the provisions in question would become a reality.

The Government representative said that section 273 of the Penal Code had become obsolete, and therefore had not been in force for a long time. Experts from the Ministry of Labour and the Ministry of Justice were working jointly to see what could be done about this, but it would take time. In the Government's report an interpretation had been given to the section-different from that of the Committee of Experts-to the effect that it had nothing to do with matters of forced labour or labour legislation.

The Committee took note of the information provided by the Government representative. It noted that the Government had indicated to the Committee of Experts that the provisions of the Penal Code, laying down penal sanctions including corporal punishment for persons who refused to take suitable employment, were utilised only with respect to persons who had violated public order. The Committee shared the hope expressed by the Committee of Experts that the Government would take the necessary measures to ensure conformity with the Convention in legislation and in practice. The Committee also expressed the hope that progress would be reported next year.

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

Articles 1 (1), 2 (1) and 25 of the Convention. Trafficking in persons. The Committee previously noted that the Law on Combating Human Trafficking of 2004 was under review. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the Bill on “Combating Human and Body Organ Trafficking and Punishment of Unlawful Traffickers” was finalized in the Legal and Judicial Committee of the Parliament and is currently being discussed in the Parliament. The Government emphasizes that the goal of the Bill is to summarize and update the country’s applicable laws and regulations to better combat trafficking in persons, especially the trafficking of Afghan citizens and trafficking in the Eastern borders. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that all cases of trafficking in persons investigated by the Human Trafficking Control Committee and the National Security Council are related to trafficking of immigrants whose objective is to work, study, live and stay in Iran or to transit to Europe. The Government adds that labour inspectors are paying due attention to the supervision of the recruitment of foreign workers, undertaking periodic inspections and applying the corresponding penalties for violation of the labour regulations.

The Committee duly notes that the Government is reviewing the anti-trafficking legislation with a view to better protecting Afghan citizens from trafficking practices and hopes that the definition of trafficking in persons that will be contained in the new legislation will cover both national and transnational trafficking, as well as trafficking for both labour and sexual exploitation. Pending the adoption of this new legislation, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the investigations and prosecutions regarding cases of trafficking in persons under the 2004 Law on Combating Human Trafficking. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the specific measures taken to prevent trafficking in persons in the country, as well as to provide adequate protection to the victims irrespective of their migration status.

Article 2 (2) c). Prison labour for private entities. The Committee notes that section 80 of the Bylaws of Prisons Organization and Security and Educational Measures provides for the possibility of prisoners to participate in employment in exchange for welfare privileges, including wages and participation in educational and cultural services. Pursuant to section 189 of the Bylaws, at their request and subject to the approval of the Classification Council, prisoners can work in workshops and industrial, agricultural and service institutions inside or outside the penitentiary institution. The Committee further notes that in its mid-term Universal Periodic Review Report (2020-2021) to the United Nations Human Rights Council, the Government indicates that eligible convicts in prison are employed in workshops, in-cell employment, and public and private employment centres (see page 54 of the report). The Committee recalls in this regard the principle according to which the work by convicted prisoners for private entities is not compatible with the Convention, except when such work is performed by prisoners under conditions approximating a free labour relationship, and on the basis of their free, formal, and informed consent. Therefore, the Committee requests the Government to indicate how it is ensured in practice that prisoners give their free, formal, and informed consent before working for the benefit of private entities, and that their conditions of work approximate those of a free labour relationship.

Article 25. Penal sanctions applied to forced labour. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report under the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) that 83 forced labour related criminal cases were reported between March 2020 and March 2022. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the legal proceedings initiated, the sentences handed down and the sanctions applied in relation to these cases, specifying under what provisions of the criminal legislation, the act of subjecting another to forced labour can be prosecuted.

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

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. Trafficking in persons. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that a Committee on Combating Human Trafficking was established comprising representatives from the concerned ministries and executive departments and that it was seeking to launch a database on statistics of the victims and sentences issued for convicted traffickers. The Government further indicated that the Law on Combating Human Trafficking of 2004 was under review with the collaboration of the relevant departments.

The Committee notes the Government’s information that the draft amendments to the Law on Combating Human Trafficking of 2004 have been completed and will be presented to the Council of Ministers and to the Parliament for approval. The Government also indicates that so far no database on cases of trafficking of persons has been launched due to lack of integrated and coherent cooperation among concerned countries. The Committee also notes the information provided by the Government on the measures taken to combat trafficking in persons. This includes identification of border gaps and allocation of the required budget to cover border gaps and closure and control of borders with priority on southeast and northwest regions, and intensification of control measures at the borders and making transit routes more risky for human trafficking networks and gangs. Moreover, provincial committees have been specifically reinforced on transit routes and required notifications are provided in order to monitor and fight trafficking in persons. The Committee further notes the Government’s information that issues on human trafficking, prosecuted by the Interpol are registered and followed in the relevant system and that no cases of trafficking for forced labour or sexual exploitation have been observed. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken to prevent, suppress and combat trafficking in persons, including by the Committee on Combating Human Trafficking, and the results achieved in this respect. It also requests the Government to provide information on the number of prosecutions initiated in cases of trafficking in persons, both for sexual and labour exploitation, and the penalties imposed. The Committee finally requests the Government to provide a copy of the amendments to the Law on Combating Human Trafficking of 2004, once adopted.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. Trafficking in persons. The Committee previously requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of the Law on Combating Human Trafficking of 2004, indicating the measures taken to provide appropriate protection and assistance to victims of trafficking.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that a Committee on Combating Human Trafficking was established comprising representatives from the concerned ministries and executive departments including the Prosecutor General’s Office, the Police, the Passport and Border Control Police and the Office of the Interpol National Bureau. The Government states that currently it is seeking a greater collaboration with the abovementioned departments to launch a database on statistics of the victims and sentences issued for convicted traffickers to be presented to the Ministry of the Interior. Once the database is completed and launched, it will be able to provide the Committee with relevant information and data on investigations, prosecutions, convictions and the number of victims of trafficking. The Government also indicates that the Law on Combating Human Trafficking of 2004 is currently under review with the collaboration of the relevant departments.

The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the activities undertaken by the Committee on Combating Human Trafficking to prevent, suppress and combat trafficking in persons, and the results achieved in this respect. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate the progress made in the establishment of an appropriate database related to trafficking, and to provide information, once it is available, on the number of victims, prosecutions, convictions and the penalties applied. The Committee finally requests the Government to provide a copy of the revised Law on Combating Human Trafficking of 2004, once adopted.

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

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. Trafficking in persons. 1. Legislative framework. The Committee previously noted that the Government had adopted a law in 2004 on trafficking in persons. It requested a copy of this law, as well as information on the application of this Act.

The Committee notes the copy of the Law on Combating Human Trafficking of 2004, provided with the Government’s report. The Committee notes that section 1 of this Law defines trafficking as transferring a person across national borders by use of force, coercion, threats, deception, abuse of power or by taking advantage of the vulnerability of a person, for the purpose of prostitution, trade, use of body parts, slavery and marriage. Trafficking also includes receiving, transferring or concealing such a person after the crossing of a border, or abetting such an offence. Section 2 specifies that setting up or establishing a gang for this purpose, as well as transferring a person legally or illegally for the purpose of prostitution (even with their consent) also constitutes trafficking. The Committee notes that section 3 of the Law on Combating Human Trafficking states that persons who engage in human trafficking will be penalized with a prison sentence of between two and ten years, as well as a fine, or to the penalty specified in the Islamic Penal Code.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement that statistics on cases of human trafficking have not been collected, and that the numbers of convictions for perpetrators of trafficking is not available. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that information is collected and made available concerning the application in practice of the Law on Combating Human Trafficking of 2004. In this regard, the Committee requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information concerning the application of the Law, particularly the number of investigations, prosecutions, convictions and the penalties applied.

2. Prevention and law enforcement efforts. The Committee previously noted information from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime that there was a rise in trafficking in persons both to and from Iran, orchestrated by criminal networks, and the difficulties encountered by the judicial system in combating this phenomenon. It also noted the information from the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences, that there was a worrying increase in the trafficking of girls and women, mostly in the eastern provinces and particularly in border towns with Pakistan and Afghanistan (E/CN.4/2006/61/Add.3).

The Committee notes the Government’s statement that it has taken measures to provide suitable employment for women and men to prevent them from being engaged as victims of trafficking, through vocational training, capacity building and awareness raising. The Government also indicates that it has taken measures to combat poverty, particularly aimed at providing women with financial support, which can contribute to preventing human trafficking. The Committee further notes that the Human Rights Committee, in its concluding observations of 29 November 2011, expressed concern about the persistent trafficking in women and children, particularly young girls from rural areas, often facilitated by temporary marriages (CCPR/C/IRN/CO/3, paragraph 20). The Committee therefore urges the Government to strengthen its efforts to prevent, suppress and combat human trafficking, and to provide specific information on the measures taken in this regard. It also requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken to provide appropriate protection and assistance to victims of trafficking, including information on the number of persons benefiting from these measures.

Articles 1(1) and 2(1). Freedom to leave the service of the State. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 64 of the Civil Servants Code states that the resignation of a civil servant may be rejected by the employer within one month of the filing date, though the employee has the right to appeal this decision. It also observed that pursuant to section 65 of the Employment Regulations for State Companies, it appeared that a company may refuse to give approval for the resignation of an employee. Concerning these provisions, the Committee recalled that statutory provisions which prevent the termination of employment of indefinite duration by an employee by means of notice of reasonable length turns a contractual relationship based on the will of the parties into service by compulsion of law. However, the Committee noted the Government’s indication that the Civil Services Act had been adopted in 2007, and that as a result, the relevant provisions of the Civil Servants Code and the Employment Regulations for State Companies were no longer in force. The Committee requested a copy of the Civil Services Act. The Committee notes that section 48 of the Civil Services Act of 2007 specifies the situations in which employment in the civil service may be terminated. The Committee notes with interest that section 48(2) of the Civil Services Act states that employment may be terminated by resignation, and no conditions for this resignation are specified.

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

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Freedom to leave the service of the State. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to section 64 of the Civil Servants Code, under which the resignation of a civil servant may be rejected by the employer within one month of the filing date, though the employee has the right to appeal against rejection of the resignation. It also referred to section 65 of the Employment Regulations for State Companies, according to which the resignation is effective from the date on which the company approves it in writing and the employee is obliged to remain in his/her post until the end of the notice period and until the resignation is finally approved by the company. Since there is no provision making the resignation automatically effective upon the expiration of the term of notice, the Committee considered that it follows from the wording of section 65 that the company may in effect refuse to give its approval of the resignation. The Committee recalled that the effect of statutory provisions preventing termination of employment of indefinite duration by an employee by means of notice of reasonable length is to turn a contractual relationship based on the will of the parties into service by compulsion of law and is thus incompatible with the Convention. Considering that this was the case with regard to the abovementioned national provisions, the Committee requested the Government to take appropriate measures to bring them into conformity with the Convention.

The Government indicates in its report that, following the adoption of the Civil Services Act of 2007, the provisions of section 64 of the Civil Servants Code and those of section 65 of the Employment Regulations for State Companies are no longer in force. It indicates that, according to section 48(2) of the Civil Services Act, Government services employees may terminate their employment by resigning and their resignation is not subject to any prior conditions.

The Committee duly notes this information and requests the Government to provide a copy of the Civil Services Act of 2007. Furthermore, it would be grateful if the Government would provide a copy of the communications and replies of the administrative and legislative authorities concerning the interpretation of sections 64 of the Civil Servants Code and 65 of the Employment Regulations for State Companies, which the Government indicated were attached to its report but which have not been received by the Office.

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25. Trafficking in persons. The Committee notes, according to the information available on the website of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime in the Islamic Republic of Iran and in the report of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences, of the Commission on Human Rights (E/CN.4/2006/61/Add.3), that the Islamic Republic of Iran adopted a law in 2004 prohibiting the trafficking of persons and that the Government has taken steps to combat this phenomenon. However, the United Nations Office mentions a rise in trafficking in persons both to and from Iran, orchestrated by criminal networks, and the difficulties encountered by the judicial system in combating this phenomenon. The Special Rapporteur in turn refers to a worrying increase in the trafficking of girls and women, mostly in the eastern provinces and particularly in border towns with Pakistan and Afghanistan. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide, with its next report, a copy of the Act of 2004 prohibiting the trafficking of persons, as well as information on the measures taken by the Government to ensure the effective application of this Act. Please also provide information on the measures taken to raise the awareness of both the public and the judicial authorities and to prosecute those responsible for trafficking, as well as on the measures taken to assist victims. Finally, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the number of court decisions handed down against the perpetrators of this crime and the type of penalties imposed.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

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 following matters raised in its previous direct request:

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Freedom to leave the service of the State. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 64 of the Civil Servants Code, under which the resignation of a civil servant may be rejected by the employer within one month from the filing date, though the employee has the right to appeal against rejection of the resignation. The Committee also noted that the provisions of section 65 of the Employment Regulations for State Companies make the resignation effective from the date when the company approves it in writing, whereas an employee is obliged to remain in his/her occupation until the end of the notice period and until the resignation is finally approved by the company. Since there is no provision making the resignation automatically effective upon the expiration of the term of notice, it follows from the wording of section 65 that the company may in effect refuse to give its approval of the resignation.

The Committee recalled that the effect of statutory provisions preventing termination of employment of indefinite duration by means of notice of reasonable length is to turn a contractual relationship based on the will of the parties into service by compulsion of law, and is thus incompatible with the Convention. The Committee therefore considered that the above provisions do not conform to the Convention and requested the Government to take appropriate measures in order to ensure compliance.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the Committee’s comments have been communicated to legislative authorities and that any information received from these authorities will be forwarded to the ILO.

The Committee reiterates its hope that the necessary measures will be taken to ensure that all persons in the service of the State are free to leave the service on their own initiative within a reasonable period, except in circumstances that would endanger the existence or the well-being of the whole or part of the population. It requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on any progress made in this regard.

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

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Freedom to leave the service of the State. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 64 of the Civil Servants Code, under which the resignation of a civil servant may be rejected by the employer within one month from the filing date, though the employee has the right to appeal against rejection of the resignation. The Committee also noted that the provisions of section 65 of the Employment Regulations for State Companies make the resignation effective from the date when the company approves it in writing, whereas an employee is obliged to remain in his/her occupation until the end of the notice period and until the resignation is finally approved by the company. Since there is no provision making the resignation automatically effective upon the expiration of the term of notice, it follows from the wording of section 65 that the company may in effect refuse to give its approval of the resignation.

The Committee recalled that the effect of statutory provisions preventing termination of employment of indefinite duration by means of notice of reasonable length is to turn a contractual relationship based on the will of the parties into service by compulsion of law, and is thus incompatible with the Convention. The Committee therefore considered that the above provisions do not conform to the Convention and requested the Government to take appropriate measures in order to ensure compliance.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the Committee’s comments have been communicated to legislative authorities and that any information received from these authorities will be forwarded to the ILO.

The Committee reiterates its hope that the necessary measures will be taken to ensure that all persons in the service of the State are free to leave the service on their own initiative within a reasonable period, except in circumstances that would endanger the existence or the well-being of the whole or part of the population. It requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on any progress made in this regard.

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

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 following matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Freedom to leave the service of the State. Over a number of years, the Committee has been referring to section 64 of the Civil Servants Code and section 65 of the Employment Regulations for State Companies. Under section 64 of the Civil Servants Code, the resignation of a civil servant may be rejected by the employer within one month from the filing date, though the employee has the right to appeal against rejection of the resignation. As regards section 65 of the Employment Regulations for State Companies, the Committee observed that its provisions make the resignation effective from the date when the company approves it in writing, whereas an employee is obliged to remain in his/her occupation until the end of the notice period and until the resignation is finally approved by the company; since there is no provision making the resignation automatically effective upon the expiration of the term of notice, it follows from the wording of this section that the company may in effect refuse to give its approval of the resignation.

The Committee recalled, referring also to paragraph 68 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, that the effect of statutory provisions preventing termination of employment of indefinite duration by means of notice of reasonable length is to turn a contractual relationship based on the will of the parties into service by compulsion of law, and is thus incompatible with the Convention. The Committee therefore considered that the above provisions do not conform with the Convention and requested the Government to take appropriate measures in order to ensure compliance.

As regards the Government’s reference in the report to the provision of Article 2(2)(b) of the Convention, which exempts from its provisions any work or service which forms part of the normal civic obligations of the citizens, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the explanations contained in paragraph 34 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, in which the Committee recalled that the Convention specifically provides for three exceptions which constitute such normal civic obligations: compulsory military service; work or service required in cases of emergency; and minor communal services. Other examples of normal civic obligations are compulsory jury service and the duty to assist a person in danger or to assist in the enforcement of law and order. The Committee pointed out that these exceptions must be read in the light of other provisions of the Convention and cannot be invoked to justify recourse to forms of compulsory service which are contrary to such other provisions. The Committee expresses firm hope that the necessary measures will be taken to ensure that all persons in the service of the State are free to leave the service on their own initiative within a reasonable period, except in circumstances that would endanger the existence or the well-being of the whole or part of the population. It requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on any progress made in this regard.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s reply to its earlier comments. It notes in particular the Government’s explanations concerning the non-applicability of section 60 of the Civil Servants Code, following the adoption of the constitutional provisions concerning the establishment of the Court of Administrative Justice (section 173 of the Constitution of 1979).

Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Freedom to leave the service of the State. Over a number of years, the Committee has been referring to section 64 of the Civil Servants Code and section 65 of the Employment Regulations for State Companies. Under section 64 of the Civil Servants Code, the resignation of a civil servant may be rejected by the employer within one month from the filing date, though the employee has the right to appeal against rejection of the resignation. As regards section 65 of the Employment Regulations for State Companies, the Committee observed that its provisions make the resignation effective from the date when the company approves it in writing, whereas an employee is obliged to remain in his/her occupation until the end of the notice period and until the resignation is finally approved by the company; since there is no provision making the resignation automatically effective upon the expiration of the term of notice, it follows from the wording of this section that the company may in effect refuse to give its approval of the resignation.

The Committee recalled, referring also to paragraph 68 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, that the effect of statutory provisions preventing termination of employment of indefinite duration by means of notice of reasonable length is to turn a contractual relationship based on the will of the parties into service by compulsion of law, and is thus incompatible with the Convention. The Committee therefore considered that the above provisions do not conform with the Convention and requested the Government to take appropriate measures in order to ensure compliance.

As regards the Government’s reference in the report to the provision of Article 2(2)(b) of the Convention, which exempts from its provisions any work or service which forms part of the normal civic obligations of the citizens, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the explanations contained in paragraph 34 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, in which the Committee recalled that the Convention specifically provides for three exceptions which constitute such normal civic obligations: compulsory military service; work or service required in cases of emergency; and minor communal services. Other examples of normal civic obligations are compulsory jury service and the duty to assist a person in danger or to assist in the enforcement of law and order. The Committee pointed out that these exceptions must be read in the light of other provisions of the Convention and cannot be invoked to justify recourse to forms of compulsory service which are contrary to such other provisions. The Committee expresses firm hope that the necessary measures will be taken to ensure that all persons in the service of the State are free to leave the service on their own initiative within a reasonable period, except in circumstances that would endanger the existence or the well-being of the whole or part of the population. It requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on any progress made in this regard.

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

The Committee has noted the information provided by the Government in reply to its general observation of 2000.

It has also noted the information concerning employment of prisoners supplied by the Government in reply to its earlier comments.

The Committee asks the Government once again to supply, in its next report, full information on the following matters raised in its previous direct request.

Articles 1, paragraph 1, and 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention. Referring to its earlier comments concerning the freedom to leave the service of the State, the Committee noted the Government’s explanations relating to sections 60 and 64 of the Civil Servants Code and section 65 of the Employment Regulations for State Companies. The Government indicated that section 64 of the Civil Servants Code does not provide for criteria for the acceptance or non-acceptance of resignation, but rather provides for the right to resign and the right of the employer to accept or reject the resignation, as well as the right of the employee to appeal against rejection of the resignation. The Committee refers in this connection to paragraph 68 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour where it recalled that the effect of statutory provisions preventing termination of employment of indefinite duration by means of notice of reasonable length is to turn a contractual relationship based on the will of the parties into service by compulsion of law, and is thus incompatible with the Convention. The Committee therefore considers that the present section 64 does not conform to the Convention and hopes that appropriate measures will be adopted to bring this section of the Civil Servants Code into conformity with the Convention and that the Government will supply information on action taken to this end.

As regards section 65 of the Employment Regulations for State Companies, the Committee noted the Government’s statement that this section does not provide for a possibility to reject the resignation. However, the Committee observes that this section makes the resignation effective from the date when the company approves it in writing, whereas an employee is obliged to remain in his/her occupation until the end of the notice period and until the resignation is finally approved by the company. Since there is no provision making the resignation automatically effective upon the expiration of the term of notice, it follows from the wording of this section that the company may in effect refuse to give its approval of the resignation. The Committee therefore hopes that the Government will reconsider this section and that the necessary measures will be adopted in order to bring section 65 into conformity with the Convention on this point. It asks the Government to provide, in its next report, information on any progress made in this regard.

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

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 following matters raised in its previous direct request.

1.  Article 1, paragraph 1, and Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention. With reference to its earlier comments concerning the freedom to leave the service of the State, the Committee notes the Government’s explanations relating to sections 60 and 64 of the Civil Servants Code and section 65 of the Employment Regulations for State Companies. The Government indicates that section 64 of the Civil Servants Code does not provide for criteria for the acceptance or non-acceptance of resignation, but rather provides for the right to resign and the right of the employer to accept or reject the resignation, as well as the right of the employee to appeal against rejection of the resignation. The Committee refers in this connection to paragraph 68 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour where it recalled that the effect of statutory provisions preventing termination of employment of indefinite duration by means of notice of reasonable length is to turn a contractual relationship based on the will of the parties into service by compulsion of law, and is thus incompatible with the Convention. The Committee therefore considers that the present section 64 does not conform to the Convention and hopes that appropriate measures will be adopted to bring section 64 of the Civil Servants Code into conformity with the Convention and that the Government will supply information on action taken to this end.

As regards section 65 of the Employment Regulations for State Companies, the Committee notes the Government=s statement that this section does not provide for a possibility to reject the resignation. However, the Committee observes that this section makes the resignation effective from the date when the company approves it in writing, whereas an employee is obliged to remain in his/her occupation until the end of the notice period and until the resignation is finally approved by the company. Since there is no provision making the resignation automatically effective upon expiry of the term of notice, it follows from the wording of this section that the company may in effect refuse to give its approval of the resignation. The Committee therefore hopes that the Government will reconsider this section and that the necessary measures will be adopted in order to bring section 65 into conformity with the Convention on this point. It asks the Government to provide, in its next report, information on any progress made in this regard.

2.  Article 2, paragraph 2(c).  The Committee refers to its general observation under the Convention made in its report to the 87th Session of the International Labour Conference (1999) and requests that the information sought therein be included by the Government in its next report.

Referring also to its previous observation addressed to the Government, the Committee asks the Government to supply the full text of the Islamic Penal Code of 1996.

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

1. Article 1, paragraph 1, and Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention. With reference to its earlier comments concerning the freedom to leave the service of the State, the Committee notes the Government's explanations relating to sections 60 and 64 of the Civil Servants Code and section 65 of the Employment Regulations for State Companies. The Government indicates that section 64 of the Civil Servants Code does not provide for criteria for the acceptance or non-acceptance of resignation, but rather provides for the right to resign and the right of the employer to accept or reject the resignation, as well as the right of the employee to appeal against rejection of the resignation. The Committee refers in this connection to paragraph 68 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour where it recalled that the effect of statutory provisions preventing termination of employment of indefinite duration by means of notice of reasonable length is to turn a contractual relationship based on the will of the parties into service by compulsion of law, and is thus incompatible with the Convention. The Committee therefore considers that the present section 64 does not conform to the Convention and hopes that appropriate measures will be adopted to bring section 64 of the Civil Servants Code into conformity with the Convention and that the Government will supply information on action taken to this end.

As regards section 65 of the Employment Regulations for State Companies, the Committee notes the Government's statement that this section does not provide for a possibility to reject the resignation. However, the Committee observes that this section makes the resignation effective from the date when the company approves it in writing, whereas an employee is obliged to remain in his/her occupation until the end of the notice period and until the resignation is finally approved by the company. Since there is no provision making the resignation automatically effective upon expiry of the term of notice, it follows from the wording of this section that the company may in effect refuse to give its approval of the resignation. The Committee therefore hopes that the Government will reconsider this section and that the necessary measures will be adopted in order to bring section 65 into conformity with the Convention on this point. It asks the Government to provide, in its next report, information on any progress made in this regard.

2. Article 2, paragraph 2(c). The Committee refers to its general observation under the Convention made in its report to the 87th Session of the International Labour Conference (1999) and requests that the information sought therein will be included by the Government in its next report.

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

Further to its previous comments on section 273bis of the Penal Code, under which any person who did not have definite means of subsistence and who, whether through idleness or through negligence, did not look for work, could be obliged by the Government to take employment, the Committee notes with interest from the Government's report that the Islamic Penal Code of 1996 has entirely repealed and replaced the previous Penal Code, including the abovementioned section.

The Committee looks forward to examining the full text of the Islamic Penal Code of 1996 and hopes that a copy will be made available by the Government.

The Committee is addressing a request on certain other points directly to the Government.

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

1. The Committee notes the Government's statement in its latest report that section 712 of the Islamic Penal Code adopted on 23 May 1996 has replaced section 273 of the old Penal Code. It also notes that the new section 729 of the Islamic Penal Code repeals all laws which are contrary to the new Code. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate, in its next report, whether the old Penal Code remains in force. If it is still in force, please indicate whether section 273bis of the old Penal Code, under which any person who does not have definite means of subsistence and who, whether through idleness or through negligence, does not look for work may be obliged by the Government to take employment, has been replaced or repealed. Please supply a complete text of the Islamic Penal Code adopted on 23 May 1996.

2. With reference to its earlier comments concerning the freedom to leave the service of the State, the Committee has noted the Government's explanations in the report received in 1993 relating to sections 60 and 64 of the Civil Servants Code and section 65 of the Employment Regulations for State Companies. Contrary to its previous statement, the Government indicates that the aim of prevention of a person concerned from being unemployed cannot be used as a criterion for taking a decision to refuse an application to resign. While noting the Government's statement that the above-mentioned provisions concerning a possibility to refuse an application to resign are very rarely applied in practice, the Committee repeats its request to the Government to indicate the provisions establishing the criteria for decisions on acceptance of resignations and to supply the relevant texts.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

In its comments, the Committee referred to the freedom to leave the service of the State. The Committee notes the Government's explanations, particularly regarding means of redress. With regard to sections 60 and 64 of the Civil Servants Code and regulation 65 of the Employment Regulations for State Companies, the Committee gathers from the information in the Government's report that an application to resign could be refused in order to prevent the person concerned from becoming unemployed. The Committee asks the Government to provide any provisions establishing the criteria for decisions on resignation together with all other relevant texts.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the provisions of section 273bis of the Penal Code, under which any person who does not have definite means of subsistence and who, whether through idleness or through negligence, does not look for work may be obliged by the Government to take employment. The Committee notes the Government's indication in its report received in 1992 that a new Islamic Penal Code has been promulgated and that a copy will be sent. The Committee hopes to receive the Code in the near future.

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

The Committee notes that the Government's report does not address the questions raised in the previous direct request. It hopes that the next report will include full information on the following matters.

The Committee has noted the Government's statement in its report supplied in 1988 that there are no restrictions for persons employed in the public sector to leave the service on their own initiative in times of peace and in circumstances where the life and well-being of the population are not endangered.

In its previous comments, the Committee noted that under section 64 of the Civil Servant Code, the Minister may refuse the resignation and, in such a case, the civil servant concerned may lodge an appeal under a procedure provided for under section 60 of the Code. It also noted that section 65 of the Employment Regulations for state companies provides that the resignation is accepted when the company gives the applicant a written approval. Referring to an indication by the Government in an earlier report, the Committee further noted that the Bill relating to the revision of Resignation Regulations for the Armed Forces, adopted on 29 April 1980, provides that both persons educated at the Government's expense to serve in the armed forces and those for whose education the Government has not incurred expense may ask to resign but the force or organisation concerned may in any case refuse the resignation.

The Committee requests the Government to supply copies of guide-lines or regulations defining the circumstances in which the Minister may refuse the resignation of a civil servant. More generally, the Committee again requests the Government to supply the full texts or copies of all relevant sections of the statutory instruments referred to above, indicating also any measures which have been taken or which may be contemplated to ensure that all persons in the service of the State are free to leave the service on their own initiative within a reasonable period, except in circumstances that would endanger the existence or the well-being of the whole or part of the population.

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

1. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the provisions of section 273 bis of the Penal Code, under which any person who does not have definite means of subsistence and who, whether through laziness or through negligence, does not look for work may be obliged by the Government to take suitable employment. The Committee notes with interest the Government's indication in its latest report that this provision has been abolished and a new Penal Code approved by the Islamic Consultative Assembly for a trial period. The Government states that this Code is not incompatible with the provisions of the Convention and that a copy of it will be supplied after translation. The Committee looks forward to examining the new Code.

2. In its report supplied in 1977, the Government indicated that the Regulations of 24 March 1938 concerning unemployed persons and vagrants were repealed. The Government has not so far supplied a copy of the repealing legislation, as requested by the Committee. The Committee hopes that the Government will either make this legislation available for examination or indicate in which manner the repeal of the Regulations has taken place and has been made publicly known.