Texts of pending comments

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

Repetition

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of public employees, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing. In its previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to take measures to amend the National Conditions of Service (NCS), which provides that all employees are free to join a “recognized” staff association or union, given that there is no legislative provision relating to union recognition. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Kiribati Public Service Office is currently working on amending the NCS and that consideration will be given to reviewing section L.7 so as to ensure its consistency with the Employment and Industrial Relations Code (EIRC). The Committee trusts that the reference to “recognized” staff associations or unions will soon be removed from section L.7 of the NCS for the purposes of legal certainty and requests the Government to provide information on the progress made in this respect.

Article 3. Right of workers’ and employers’ organizations to organize their activities. The Committee had previously observed that the following provisions of the EIRC could unduly restrict the right to take industrial action: approval of strike action by a majority of the employees (section 139); declaration of a strike as illegal by the administrative authority (sections 136–139); and penal sanctions in the form of fines for participation in unlawful strikes (sections 136–139 in conjunction with section 152). The Committee requested the Government to consider reviewing the above provisions with a view to ensuring that, in a strike ballot, account is only taken of the votes cast, that the declaration of a strike as unlawful emanates from an independent body and that no penal sanctions in the form of fines are imposed in unlawful yet peaceful strikes. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that while the EIRC of 2015 was amended in 2017, further consultations with the competent authorities and social partners were required in order to ensure that declaration of a strike as unlawful emanates from an independent body and that no penal sanctions in the form of fines are imposed in unlawful yet peaceful strikes. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the developments in this regard.

While noting that section 139 of the EIRC was amended in 2017, the Committee observes that the required majority remains unchanged. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to amend section 139(1)(b) of the EIRC so as to ensure that in a strike ballot, account is taken only of the votes cast and asks the Government to provide information on measures taken to that end.

Dispute resolution procedure. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that pursuant to section 128(2)(a) and (c) of the EIRC, the Registrar may refer a dispute for arbitration if: (a) one or more of the parties request to refer the dispute for arbitration; or (c) if a dispute has been protracted or is tending to endanger or has endangered the personal health, safety or welfare of the community or part of it. The Committee recalled that recourse to compulsory arbitration to bring an end to a collective labour dispute and a strike is only acceptable if it is at the request of both parties involved in the dispute or if the strike in question may be restricted, or even prohibited, that is: (i) in the case of disputes concerning public servants exercising authority in the name of the State; (ii) in conflicts in essential services in the strict sense of the term (that is, services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population); or (iii) in situations of acute national or local crisis, and that, accordingly, the existence of protracted disputes and the failure of conciliation are not per se elements which justify the imposition of compulsory arbitration. In this regard, the Committee considered that subsections (a) (the element of compulsion being that one party alone is able to pursue the dispute by arbitration) and (c) (referring to protracted industrial actions) of section 128(2) were likely to make it possible to prohibit virtually all strikes or to end them quickly. The Committee notes the Government’s indications acknowledging the inconsistencies of section 128(2) with the Convention and informing that the issue has been discussed by the Decent Work Advisory Board and will require further consultations with the Attorney General’s Office and the Board to consider future amendments. The Committee further notes that the Government seeks its views on the role of the Registrar in the referral of disputes to arbitration under section 128(2) – determining whether the circumstances in subsections (a) to (c) are met. The Committee considers that the determination of the Registrar should be limited to verifying the existence of the conditions for resorting to compulsory arbitration noted above. The Committee hopes that section 128(2)(a) and (c) of the EIRC will be reviewed in consultation with the social partners with a view to ensuring that compulsory arbitration is possible only in cases that are in line with the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on developments in this regard.

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

Repetition

Article 4 of the Convention. Right to collective bargaining. The Committee noted in its previous comments that sections 4 (definition of collective agreement) and 60 (parties with power to initiate collective bargaining) of the Employment and Industrial Relations Code refer to employers or employers’ organizations and unions, but not explicitly to federations and confederations. It also requested the Government to clarify whether federations and confederations have the possibility of engaging in collective bargaining at levels higher than enterprise level and to provide information on the number of collective agreements concluded during the reporting period and the sectors and the number of workers covered. The Committee notes with concern the Government’s indication that sections 60–73 of the Employment and Industrial Relations Code of 2015 that stipulates the rights of unions and organizations to collective bargaining, their obligation to act in good faith and the procedures relating to this function are not in force at the moment. It also notes the Government’s indication that only two unions are currently involved in collective bargaining agreements in the country. In order to both guarantee and promote the right to bargain collectively, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the Employment and Industrial Relations Code sections relating to collective bargaining are effectively in force. It also requests the Government to take the necessary measures as to amend the legislation with a view to ensuring that federations and confederations have the possibility of engaging in collective bargaining at levels higher than enterprise level. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in this respect.

The Committee also requests the Government to provide, in its next regular report, the information required in its previous comments concerning the application of Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention.

The Committee notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) received on 1 September 2021. The Committee notes the detailed discussion which took place at the 109th Session of the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in June 2021, concerning the application by Kiribati of the Convention, as well as the Government’s report.

Follow-up to the conclusions of the Committee on the Application of Standards (International Labour Conference, 109th Session, June 2021)

Article 3 of the Convention. Worst forms of child labour. Clause (b). Use, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution. The Committee previously noted that section 118(f) of the Employment and Industrial Relations Code, 2015 (EIRC), established penalties for the use, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution. It noted that the ILO-IPEC Rapid assessment study of 2012 identified 33 girls between 10 and 17 years who were engaged in prostitution. This study indicated that 85 per cent of these girls first engaged in prostitution between 10 and 15 years of age and that the most common place for prostitution was on foreign boats. The Committee further noted that the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women as well as the UN Country Team Fiji (which covers Kiribati) highlighted, in their reports of 2020, the existence of commercial sexual exploitation of children, in particular on foreign fishing vessels. The Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that persons contravening section 118(f) of the EIRC are investigated and prosecuted and to provide information on the number of violations identified as well as on the prosecutions, convictions and penalties applied.

The Committee notes from the Government’s written information to the Conference Committee that the labour inspectors are working with the police department for prosecutions of more serious on-going cases of non-compliance. The Committee also notes the statement made by the Government representative to the Conference Committee that initiatives are underway to improve monitoring of the worst forms of child labour through policy and legislative reforms, better response systems in the form of referral pathways and better coordination with stakeholders. The Committee notes that the Conference Committee urged the Government to effectively investigate and prosecute perpetrators of child prostitution, including through the establishment of formal procedures to proactively identify victims and refer them to protective services.

The Committee notes the observations made by the ITUC that there is a persistent practice of child prostitution and sexual exploitation of girls among vulnerable populations. However, there are no reported cases which points to the severe shortcomings in the enforcement of the legislation, programmes and institutional measures.

The Committee notes the Government’s information in its report that currently there are no prosecutions of perpetrators of child prostitution with the Kiribati Police Service (KPS). The Government indicates that the KPS through the Domestic Violence, Child Protection and Sexual offence Unit (DCSU) provides protective measures to children at risk and support in prosecuting perpetrators involved in the worst forms of child labour. The Committee further notes the Government’s statement referring to the need to (i) establish a well-coordinated approach towards the worst forms of child labour; (ii) the revision of legislative and policy measures; and (iii) to provide special training and capacity building of the labour inspectors and law enforcement bodies to attain a more successful result in prosecution. The Committee encourages the Government to take the necessary measures to strengthen the capacities of the law enforcement bodies in order to better identify, investigate and prosecute perpetrators of the offences related to the use, procuring or offering of children under 18 years for prostitution. It requests the Government to continue providing information on the measures taken in this regard as well as information on the application in practice of section 118(f) of the EIRC, including the investigations, prosecutions and penalties applied.

Article 7(2). Effective and time-bound measures. Clauses (a) and (b). Preventing the engagement of children in the worst forms of child labour, removing them from these worst forms of child labour and ensuring their rehabilitation and social integration. Commercial sexual exploitation. The Committee previously noted that the Kiribati Community Police patrol carried out rounds during the night to prevent and remove child victims of commercial sexual exploitation. It also noted that the Ministry of Women, Youth, Sports and Social Affairs (MWYSSA) and the Ministry of Health and Medical Services established new divisions responsible for providing counselling and guidance in resolving problems, including for cases of the worst forms of child labour. It further noted that the MWYSSA conducted awareness-raising activities among owners and members of kava bars who employ underage girls to work at night and also provided advice and counselling to these children and empowered them to integrate into the community, including through education and awareness-raising.

The Committee notes the Government’s information that the Social Welfare Officers (SWO) are mandated to ensure the safety, welfare and well-being of children under 18 years of age pursuant to the provisions of the Children, Young People and Family Welfare Act of 2013. Accordingly, a Child Protection Referral Pathway (CPRP) which comprises the related ministries, the KPS, NGOs and communities has been established to report and refer cases of exploitation of children and provide protection and assistance to child victims. For any reports received concerning the exploitation of children, the SWO takes immediate measures to withdraw children from such situation and send them to their parents and monitor the case. The Government also indicates that it has initiated a toll-free number to report on activities considered to be the worst forms of child labour. The MWYSSA, the Ministry of Employment and Human Resource and the Ministry of Education conduct awareness raising programmes at schools on the worst forms of child labour. While noting the measures taken by the Government, the Committee requests the Government to strengthen its measures to prevent the engagement of children in commercial sexual exploitation, and to remove them from this worst form of child labour as well as to rehabilitate and socially integrate them. It requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken in this regard, as well as on the number of children under 18 years of age who have been removed from commercial sexual exploitation and provided with appropriate care and assistance.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Article 3 of the Convention. Worst forms of child labour. Clause (c). Use, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities, in particular for the production and trafficking of drugs. The Committee previously noted that section 118(h) and (i) of the Employment and Industrial Relations Code, 2015 (EIRC) prohibited the use, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities and for the production or trafficking of illegal drugs, respectively. The Government indicated that there is little mechanism in place for enforcing section 118(h) and (i) of the EIRC.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement in its written information to the Conference Committee that future trainings and capacity building activities for labour inspectors will ensure the effective enforcement of the provisions of the EIRC. The Committee encourages the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure the effective implementation of section 118(h) and (i) of the EIRC. It requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken in this regard, as well as information on the application in practice of sections 118(h) and (i) of the EIRC.

Clause (d) and Article 4. Hazardous work and determination of types of hazardous work. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 117(1) of the EIRC prohibited the employment of children under 18 years of age in hazardous work. The Committee noted that the ILO-IPEC rapid assessment identified potential hazardous activities that many of the children engage in, such as mixing cement, working as a seafarer, selling on the roadside, loading and unloading cargo, working in bars and hotels, and climbing trees for toddy drinks, all for long hours and in unsafe conditions. The Committee also noted from the Kiribati Social Development Indicator Survey carried out in 2018–19 that 14.9 per cent of children performed work under hazardous conditions (19.7 per cent for boys and 9.9 per cent for girls). The Committee further noted the Government’s indication that the Ministry of Employment and Human Resource (MEHR) with the assistance of the ILO and other relevant stakeholders, had developed a list of hazardous work which was under review by the Attorney General’s Office before adoption by the Cabinet.

The Committee notes from the Government’s written information to the Conference Committee that the Regulation on the list of Hazardous Activities prohibited to children under 18 years will soon be finalised. The Committee hopes that the list of hazardous types of work prohibited for children under 18 years of age will be adopted and enforced in the near future, and requests the Government to provide a copy of the list, once adopted. It also requests the Government to provide information on the number of violations detected and penalties imposed with regard to hazardous work performed by children under 18 years of age.

Article 5. Monitoring mechanisms. The Committee previously noted the Government’s statement that there were few mechanisms to enforce the requirement for employers to provide employment registers, and it acknowledged the gaps and limitations in the procedures and actions taken by labour inspectors during their inspections. The Government indicated that discussions were underway with the Kiribati Police Service and the Ministry of Women, Youth, Sports and Social Affairs (MWYSSA) to cooperate in addressing any issues relating to the worst forms of child labour. Recalling the importance of appropriate mechanisms to secure the enforcement of legal provisions on the worst forms of child labour, the Committee encouraged the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that labour inspectors were provided with sufficient resources and capacity to effectively monitor and eliminate the worst forms of child labour.

The Committee notes from the Government’s written information to the Conference Committee that the MEHR responsible for the implementation of the EIRC have four inspectors. These inspectors have carried out 526 inspections from 2017 to 2020 and have detected violations in 303 enterprises concerning conditions of employment such as hours of work, non-payment of wages and unfair terminations. The Government indicates that labour inspections have not been extended to the private and informal sectors and in sectors identified as places of high risk of child labour, such as fishing vessels, kava bars, street vending, domestic works and night clubs.

The Committee also notes the Government’s information in its report that in August 2021, the labour inspectors initiated a pilot inspection throughout South Tarawa with a focus on places of high risk of child labour and found nine children between 10 and 16 years involved in hazardous work related to street vending and work during late hours. These children were referred to the Kiribati Police Service (KPS) and the MWYSSA for respective actions and follow-ups. The Committee notes that the Government provides a copy of the recently developed check-list which is used for inspections on the worst forms of child labour. Moreover, discussions are underway between the MEHR, Ministry of Finance and Economic Development and the Public Service Office on allocating more resources to labour inspectors, conducting specific trainings to identify the worst forms of child labour and recruiting more staff to assist in monitoring the worst forms of child labour. In addition, the KPS and MWYSSA have initiated discussions on conducting a joint inspection programme to places considered as high risk, after having received the appropriate training and capacity building. The Committee finally notes the Government’s information that following the recommendations of the Committee of the Decent Work Advisory Board (DWAB), a Child Labour Task Force will be created with relevant stakeholders for the effective enforcement of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the establishment of the Child Labour Task Force and its functioning as regards the identification and elimination of the worst forms of child labour. It also strongly encourages the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the labour inspectors and the KPS are provided with the appropriate training, sufficient resources and capacity to effectively monitor the worst forms of child labour, including in the informal sector and in areas where there is a high risk of the worst forms of child labour. It requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken in this regard, as well as extracts from reports or documents indicating the extent and nature of the violations reported relating to children and young persons involved in the worst forms of child labour.

Article 7(1). Penalties. The Committee previously noted that the penalties established under section 118(2) of the EIRC for the contravention of the prohibition of the worst forms of child labour under section 118(1) relate to a fine of 5,000 dollars or a term of imprisonment of ten years, or both. The Committee recalled that, given the seriousness of the worst forms of child labour and the dissuasive effect that the penalties should have, legislation providing for the possibility of a fine alone cannot be considered effective.

The Committee notes the Government’s information that the Office of the Attorney General will conduct the necessary consultations with the social partners and the DWAB to ensure that the EIRC is consistent with the Convention. The Committee accordingly expresses the firm hope that the necessary measures will be taken, both in law and in practice, to ensure that sufficiently effective and dissuasive sanctions are imposed on the perpetrators of the worst forms of child labour prohibited under section 118(1) of the EIRC. It requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken in this regard and on the application in practice of section 118(2) of the EIRC, indicating the type of sanctions imposed.

Article 7(2). Effective and time-bound measures. Clause (a). Preventing the engagement of children in the worst forms of child labour. Access to free basic education. The Committee previously noted that the Education Act No. 12 of 2013 provides for free and compulsory education at the primary and junior secondary school and provides for penalties for its contravention. It also noted that according to the 2018–19 Kiribati Social Development Indicator Survey, the primary school net attendance ratio was 94.8 per cent for boys and 96.9 per cent for girls and the junior secondary school net attendance ratio was 73.2 per cent for boys and 87.7 per cent for girls (pages 257 and 259).

The Committee notes the Government’s information that the Ministry of Education (MoE) through its Policy Planning and Research Development Division has conducted awareness raising on the Education Act in almost all Islands, except Line and Phoenix Islands, which is targeted to be completed by this year. In addition, the MoE developed the Logic Framework for the Education Sector Strategic Plan (ESSP) 2020-2023, with the aim to strategically, and efficiently support the delivery of quality education, to make all schools accessible and well resourced, and to provide access of all school-age children in Kiribati to high quality education. The Committee also notes the information from the 2018 Global Partnership for Education, that the Pacific Islands Education Ministers’ Forum, in which Kiribati participates, adopted the Pacific Regional Education Framework (PacREF) 2018-2030: Moving Towards Education 2030. This framework aims to promote equitable access to high quality education and encourages inclusivity and opportunities for equal access to informal, primary, secondary and tertiary education and training. The Committee further notes that according to the UNESCO estimates the net enrolment rate at the primary level was 96.1 per cent in 2020. Considering that education is key in preventing children from being engaged in the worst forms of child labour, the Committee encourages the Government to pursue its efforts to facilitate access to free basic education, at the primary and secondary levels for all children. It requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken in this regard as well as its impact, including within the framework of the ESSP and PacREF in improving access to free basic education.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Committee takes note of the observations of the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) and the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), received by the Office on 1 and 26 October 2020 and 4 October 2021, alleging that ratifying States have failed to comply with certain provisions of the Convention during the COVID-19 pandemic. Noting with deep concern the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the protection of seafarers’ rights as laid out in the Convention, the Committee refers to its general observation of 2020 and its comments on the General Report of 2021 on this issue.

The Committee notes with concern that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

The Committee notes the Government’s first report on the application of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, as amended (MLC, 2006). It notes that no other Conventions on maritime labour had previously been ratified by Kiribati. The Committee notes that the amendments to the Code approved by the International Labour Conference in 2014, introducing the new Standard A2.5.2 and replacing Standard A4.2 by Standards A4.2.1 and A4.2.2, entered into force for Kiribati on 18 January 2017. It notes the efforts undertaken by the Government to implement the Convention. Following a first review of the information and documents available, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the following issues. If considered necessary, the Committee may come back to other matters at a later stage.

General questions on application. Implementing measures. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to the draft Maritime Act 2016 and the draft Merchant Shipping Regulations 2016 (hereafter, the draft Regulations) which are yet to be adopted by the Parliament. While acknowledging that these drafts represent important steps towards the implementation of the Convention, the Committee notes that some draft provisions need to be revised in order to ensure full conformity with the Convention, as explained in detail below. The Committee hopes that the Government will make concrete progress in the implementation of the Convention in the near future and requests it to provide information in this regard.

Article II of the Convention, paragraphs 1(f), 2, 3 and 7. Scope of application. Seafarers. The Committee notes that according to section 3(1) of the draft Regulations, a seafarer is defined as any person who is employed in any capacity on board a ship to which these Regulations apply. The Committee also notes that this definition contains a list of persons who are not considered seafarers, including, among others: (i) scientists, researchers, divers, specialist off-shore technicians etc. whose work is not part of the routine business of the ship; (ii) harbour pilots, inspectors, surveyors, auditors, superintendents etc., who, although trained and qualified in maritime skills and performing key specialist functions, their work is not part of the routine business of the ship; (iii) guest entertainers, repair technicians, portworkers whose work is occasional and short term with their principal place of employment being ashore; (iv) non-marine personnel, employed under outsourced service agreements, the terms of which determine the conditions under which the service provider will supply the necessary personnel. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether these determinations have been made after consultations with the shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations concerned as required by Article II, paragraphs 3 and 7, of the Convention (as also contained in section 3(3) of the draft Regulations). Concerning the last element of the list – non-marine personnel – the Committee recalls that under the terms of the resolution concerning information on occupational groups, adopted by the 94th (Maritime) Session of the International Labour Conference in 2006, “Persons who regularly spend more than short periods aboard, even where they perform tasks that are not normally regarded as maritime tasks, may still be regarded as seafarers for the purpose of this Convention regardless of their position on board.” The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate how the decision to exclude non-marine personnel from the definition of “seafarer” in the draft Regulations takes into account this resolution.

Article II, paragraph 6. Scope of application. Ships under 200 gross tonnage. The Committee notes that section 4 of the draft Regulations provides that where the competent authority determines that it would not be reasonable or practicable at the present time to apply certain details in provisions of “these Regulations” to a ship or particular categories of ships, those details will not apply to seafarers on the ship or ships concerned to the extent that those seafarers are covered by other provisions relating to those details and that the other provisions fully implement the relevant provisions of the Regulations of the Convention. Such a determination may only be made in consultation with the shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations and may only be made with respect to ships of less than 200 gross tonnages not engaged in international voyages. The Committee recalls that the flexibility provided for in Article II, paragraph 6, only pertains to “certain details of the Code”, that is Standards and Guidelines and not to the Regulations. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to revise section 4 of the draft Regulations to ensure full conformity with the provisions of Article II, paragraph 6, thereby restricting the use of this flexibility in relation to Standards and Guidelines of the Convention.

Article VI, paragraphs (3) and (4). Concept of substantial equivalence. The Committee notes that Marine Circular No. 23/2013, which provides information to shipowners on the procedure for certification under the MLC, 2006, states that, when requesting certification, the shipowner has to carry out a gap analysis of the vessel and company policies and advise whether there are any substantial equivalencies or exemptions it would wish to be granted by the Kiribati Ship Registry. While noting that such possibility for the shipowner to request substantial equivalence is not contained in the draft Regulations, the Committee recalls that the concept of substantial equivalence is not a matter for administrative discretion but is a matter to be decided by a Member that must first make sure, in accordance with paragraphs 3 and 4 of Article VI, that it is not in a position to implement the rights and principles in the manner set out in Part A of the Code of the MLC, 2006. The Committee recalls that explanations are required where a national implementing measure differs from the requirements of Part A of the Code. In particular, the Committee needs information on the reason why the Member was not in a position to implement the requirement in Part A of the Code, as well as (unless obvious) on the reason why the Member was satisfied that the substantial equivalence met the criteria set out in paragraph 4 of Article VI. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information, as explained above, with respect to the adoption of substantial equivalence(s) and to ensure that any use of such possibility will be regulated and follow the procedure of Article VI, paragraphs 3 and 4.

Regulation 1.1 and Standard A1.1, paragraph 1. Minimum age of seafarers. The Committee notes that while section 4(1) of the draft Regulations provides that “the employment, engagement or work on board a ship of any person under the age of 16 is prohibited”, section 115(1) and (2) of the Employment and Industrial Relations (EIR) Code, 2015 states that the minimum age of 14 applies to maritime work. The Committee recalls that Standard A1.1, paragraph 1, provides that the employment, engagement or work on board a ship of any person under the age of 16 shall be prohibited and that no exceptions are permitted in this respect. Observing that the legislation currently in force is not in conformity with the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary steps, including the revision of section 115(1) and (2) of the EIR Code, to give full effect to this provision of the Convention.

Regulation 1.1 and Standard A1.1, paragraph 4. Determination of types of work which are likely to jeopardize the health and safety of seafarers under 18 years of age. The Committee notes that section 4(3) of the draft Regulations provides that the activities or work likely to jeopardize the health or safety of seafarers under the age of 18 are those that shall be determined as likely to jeopardize their health or safety by the competent authority after consultation with the shipowners’ or seafarers’ organizations, in accordance with relevant international standards. Noting that the Government has not provided information on the adoption of this list, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to give effect to this requirement of the Convention.

Regulation 1.3, paragraphs 1 and 2. Training and qualifications. The Committee notes that section 88 of the draft Maritime Act 2016 provides that training and certification on ships of more than 300 gross tonnage are determined in accordance with the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978 (STCW) provisions; certification for service on ships of less than 300 gross tonnage shall comply with section 100 of this Act, which provides that the Minister may make regulations in this respect. The Committee recalls that Regulation 1.3 does not allow for exceptions to the requirement of training or certification to work on a ship. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure full compliance with these requirements of the Convention. The Committee further notes that there are no provisions in the national legislation which require seafarers to successfully complete training for personal safety on board ship. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate how it ensures that seafarers are not permitted to work on a ship unless they have successfully completed training for personal safety on board ship, in conformity with Regulation 1.3, paragraph 2.

Regulation 2.3, paragraph 2, and Standard A2.3, paragraph 2. Hours of work and hours of rest. While noting that the Declaration of Maritime Labour Compliance (DMLC), Part I, refers to the minimum hours of rest regime, the Committee notes that section 9(4) of the draft Regulations reproduces the provisions of Standard A2.3, paragraph 5, of the Convention, thereby providing for the alternative between maximum hours of work and minimum hours of rest. The Committee recalls that, under Standard A2.3, paragraph 2, each Member shall fix either a maximum number of hours of work or a minimum number of hours of rest. The Committee considers that the determination of the system of hours of work or hours of rest has to be made by the competent authority and cannot be left to collective agreements or to the selective application by shipowners or masters. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to fix either a maximum number of hours of work or a minimum number of hours of rest in conformity with these provisions of the Convention.

Regulation 2.5 and Standard A2.5.2. Financial security in the event of abandonment. In relation to the 2014 amendments to the Code of the Convention, the Committee recalls that, pursuant to Standard A2.5.2, the Government shall ensure the provision of an expeditious and effective financial security system to assist seafarers in case of their abandonment. The Committee brings the Government’s attention to the following questions included in the revised report form for the Convention: (a) does national legislation require the provision of an expeditious and effective financial security system to assist seafarers in the event of their abandonment? (if yes, specify if the financial security system was determined after consultation with the shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations concerned); (b) has your country received requests to facilitate repatriation of a seafarer and, if yes, how did your country respond?; (c) what are the circumstances under which a seafarer is considered abandoned according to national legislation?; (d) does national legislation provide that ships that need to be certified according to Regulation 5.1.3 must carry on board a certificate or other documentary evidence of financial security issued by the financial security provider? (if yes, specify if the certificate or other documentary evidence must contain the information required by Appendix A2-I and has to be in English or accompanied by an English translation, and if a copy must be posted in a conspicuous place on board); (e) does national legislation require that the financial security system is sufficient to cover outstanding wages and other entitlements, all expenses incurred by the seafarer (including the cost of repatriation), and the essential needs of the seafarers, as defined in Standard A2.5.2, paragraph 9?; and (f) does national legislation provide for at least 30 days of notice by the financial security provider to the competent authority of the flag State before the financial security can cease? The Committee requests the Government to reply to the abovementioned questions, indicating in each case the applicable national provisions. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of a model certificate or other documentary evidence of financial security containing the information required in Appendix A2-I of the Convention (Standard A2.5.2, paragraph 7).

Regulation 3.1, paragraph 2 and the Code. On-board recreational facilities. Ships constructed before entry into force of the Convention in Kiribati. The Committee notes that the DMLC, Part I, states that ships constructed before the entry into force of the Convention would be exempted from complying with requirements of on-board recreational facilities provided for under the MLC, 2006. The Committee recalls that the possible exception contained in Regulation 3.1, paragraph 2, only concerns requirements which relate to ship construction and equipment; it does not cover however all on-board recreational facilities. With particular reference to Standard A3.1, paragraph 17, the Committee requests the Government to indicate how it ensures that on-board recreational facilities are made available to seafarers on all ships flying its flag, whether constructed before or after the entry into force of the Convention.

Regulation 4.1 and Standard A4.1, paragraph 2. Standard medical report form. The Committee notes that, while section 17(4) of the draft Regulations provides for the use of a standard medical report form, the contents of which shall be kept confidential and shall only be used to facilitate the treatment of seafarers, the Government indicates that such standard medical report form has not been adopted yet. The Committee requests the Government to adopt such document as required by Standard A4.1, paragraph 2, and provide a copy.

Regulation 4.2 and Standard A4.2.1, paragraphs 1 and 3. Shipowners’ liability. The Committee notes that the Government provided a copy of the 1977 edition of the Workmen’s Compensation Ordinance and of its subsequent amendments up to 1994. However, the Government refers in its report to a Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1998. The Committee requests the Government to clarify whether there have been legislative changes in 1998 in relation to the Workmen’s Compensation Act and, if so, to provide a copy of the amendments.

Regulation 4.2 and Standards A4.2.1 and A4.2.2. Shipowners’ liability. Financial security in the event of death or long-term disability. In relation to the 2014 amendments to the Code of the Convention, the Committee recalls that pursuant to Standards A4.2.1 and A4.2.2, national laws and regulations shall provide that the financial security system to assure compensation in the event of the death or long-term disability of seafarers due to an occupational injury, illness or hazard meet certain minimum requirements. The Committee brings the Government’s attention to the following questions included in the revised report form for the Convention: (a) what is the form taken by the system of financial security and was it determined after consultation with the shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations concerned?; (b) how do national laws and regulations ensure that the system of financial security meets the following minimum requirements: (i) payment of compensation in full and without delay, (ii) no pressure to accept payment less than the contractual amount, (iii) interim payments (while situation is being assessed) to avoid undue hardship, (iv) offsetting payment against any damages resulting from any other claim made by the seafarer against the shipowner and arising from the same incident, and (v) persons who can bring the claim for contractual compensation (seafarer, her/his next of kin, representative or designated beneficiary)?; (c) does national legislation provide that ships must carry on board a certificate or other documentary evidence of financial security issued by the financial security provider? (if yes, specify if the certificate or other documentary evidence has to contain the information required in Appendix A4-I, be in English or accompanied by an English translation, and if a copy must be posted in a conspicuous place on board); (d) does national legislation provide: (i) for at least 30 days of notice by the financial security provider to the competent authority of the flag State before the financial security can cease, (ii) that the competent authority is notified by the financial security provider if a shipowner’s financial security is cancelled or terminated, and (iii) that seafarers receive prior notification if a shipowner’s financial security is to be cancelled or terminated?; and (e) how does national legislation ensure that effective arrangements are in place to receive, deal with and impartially settle contractual claims relating to compensation in the event of the death or long-term disability of seafarers due to an occupational injury, illness or hazard, through expeditious and fair procedures? The Committee requests the Government to reply to the abovementioned questions, indicating in each case the applicable national provisions. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of a model certificate or other documentary evidence of financial security containing the information required in Appendix A4-I of the Convention (Standard A4.2.1, paragraph 14).

Regulation 4.4 and Standard A4.4, paragraphs 2 and 3. Access to shore-based welfare facilities. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that there is no plan for the development of seafarer welfare facilities in Kiribati nor plans to encourage the establishment of welfare boards. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to promote the development of welfare facilities at appropriate ports of Kiribati as well as the establishment of welfare boards, as provided for in section 20(1) and (5) of the draft Regulations and in conformity with Standard A4.4, paragraphs 2 and 3, of the Convention.

Regulation 4.5 and Standard A4.5. Social security. The Committee notes that in accordance with Standard A4.5(2) and (10), the Government specified at the time of ratification that protection would be provided for the following branches of social security: medical care; sickness benefit and employment injury benefit. However, it notes that in section 21(3) of the draft Regulations, the provisions state that the three branches covered are medical care, sickness benefit and “unemployment injury benefit”. The Committee requests the Government to review this draft provision to clarify whether the third branch covered is employment injury benefit (which would be in compliance with the declaration submitted at the time of ratification) or unemployment benefit. The Committee further notes that the Government does not provide information on the main benefits related to the protection provided. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the main benefits provided under national legislation in the branches concerned (medical care, sickness benefit and employment injury benefit). The Committee further notes that section 21(6) of the draft Regulations provides that “the competent authority shall establish fair and effective procedures for the settlement of disputes to cover all disputes relevant to the claims of the seafarers concerned, irrespective of the manner in which the coverage is provided”. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken in application of this provision.

Regulation 5.1.2 and the Code. Authorization of recognized organizations. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the inspection of compliance with the Convention has been delegated to the inspectors employed by a number of recognized organizations listed in the report. The Committee notes, however, that the Government has not provided examples of the agreements signed with such organizations. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to provide copies of such examples and to specify the functions that those organizations have been authorized to carry out.

Regulation 5.1.3 and Standard A5.1.3, paragraph 5. Interim maritime labour certificate. The Committee recalls that the Convention provides that a maritime labour certificate can be issued on an interim basis in three cases: (a) to new ships on delivery; (b) when a ship changes flag; or (c) when a shipowner ceases to assume the responsibility for the operation of a ship. It notes that the draft Regulations only refer to two cases in which an interim maritime labour certificate can be issued and does not address the circumstance when the shipowner assumes responsibility for the operation of a ship which is new to that shipowner. The Committee requests the Government to indicate how it ensures compliance with this requirement of the Convention.

Regulation 5.1.3 and Standard A5.1.3, paragraph 10. DMLC. The Committee notes that the DMLC, Part I, form available on the Kiribati Ship Registry website, only contains concise information on the main content of the national requirements embodying the relevant provisions of the Convention on the list of 16 matters to be inspected. The form does not contain however the necessary reference to the national legal provisions. Moreover, in certain instances, the form contains information that departs from the substantive content of the (draft) national legislation. One example is that under the definition of night work, the DMLC, Part I, indicates that night work is from 9 p.m. till 6 a.m. However, section 4(4) of the draft Regulations provides that “night” means a period of at least nine hours starting no later than midnight ship’s time and ending no earlier than 5 a.m. ship’s time. Another example is that the DMLC, Part I, contains information on the financial security to be provided under Regulations 2.5 and 4.2, for which no corresponding provisions of the national legislation could be found. The Committee recalls that the DMLC, Part I, must identify the national requirements, as contained in the legislation. The Committee therefore requests the Government to review the DMLC, Part I, upon adoption of the draft Regulations, in order to ensure that it would identify the national requirements embodying the relevant national legal provisions and the information on the main content of the national requirements.

In addition, the Committee observes that the DMLC, Part II, provided by the Government is a blank form and is not an example of an approved DMLC, Part II, that has been drawn up by a shipowner to set out the measures adopted to ensure ongoing compliance with the national requirements and measures proposed to ensure that there is continuous improvement, as provided under Standard A5.1.3, paragraph 10(b), of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide one or more examples of an approved DMLC, Part II.

Additional documentation requested. The Committee notes that the Government has omitted to provide some of the documents requested in the report form. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide the following documents and information: a copy of the Draft Shipping (STCW Convention, 2010) Regulation, 2016 (Regulation 1.3); a copy of the approved standardized table for shipboard working arrangements (Standard A2.3, paragraphs 10 and 11); a copy of the standard form established by the competent authority for the recording of seafarers’ daily hours of work or their daily hours of rest (Standard A2.3, paragraph 12); an example of the kind of documentation that is accepted or issued with respect to the financial security that must be provided by shipowners (Regulation 2.5, paragraph 2); a typical example of a safe manning document or equivalent issued by the competent authority (Standard A2.7, paragraph 1), together with information showing the type of ship concerned, its gross tonnage and the number of seafarers normally working on it; an example of the kind of documentation that is accepted or issued with respect to the financial security that must be provided by shipowners (Standard A4.2.1, paragraph 1(b)); an example of a document (e.g. Part II of the DMLC outlining a shipowner’s practices or on-board programmes (including risk evaluation) for preventing occupational accidents, injuries and diseases (Standard A4.3, paragraphs 1(c), 2(b) and 8); a copy of the relevant national guidelines (Regulation 4.3, paragraph 2); a copy of the document(s) used for reporting unsafe conditions or occupational accidents on board ship (Standard A4.3, paragraph 1(d)); a report or other document containing information on the objectives and standards established for your country’s inspection and certification system, including the procedures for its assessment (Regulation 5.1.1, paragraph 5); information on the budgetary allocation during the period covered by this report for the administration of your country’s inspection and certification system and the total income received during the same period on account of inspection and certification services (Standard A5.1.4, paragraph 3); a copy of the annual reports on inspection activities, in English, French or Spanish, that have been issued in accordance with Standard A5.1.4, paragraph 13, during the period covered by this report; a standard document issued to or signed by inspectors setting out their functions and powers (Standard A5.1.4, paragraph 7; see guidance in Guideline B5.1.4, paragraphs 7 and 8); a copy of any national guidelines issued to inspectors in implementation of Standard A5.1.4, paragraph 7; a copy of the form used for an inspector’s report (Standard A5.1.4, paragraph 12); a copy of any documentation that is available informing seafarers and interested others about the procedures for making a complaint (in confidence) regarding a breach of the requirements of the Convention (including seafarers’ rights) (Standard A5.1.4, paragraph 5; see guidance in Guideline B5.1.4, paragraph 3), a copy of your country’s model for on-board complaint procedures, if developed, or of typical procedures that are followed on ships that fly its flag; a copy of any national guidelines issued to inspectors in implementation of Standard A5.2.1, paragraph 7; the following statistical information for the period covered by this report: the number of foreign ships inspected in port; number of more detailed inspections carried out according to Standard A5.2.1, paragraph 1; the number of cases where significant deficiencies were detected; the number of detentions of foreign ships due, wholly or partly, to conditions on board ship that are clearly hazardous to the safety, health or security of seafarers, or constitute a serious or repeated breach of the requirements of MLC, 2006 (including seafarers’ rights); a copy of a document, if any, that describes the onshore complaint-handling procedures (Standard A5.2.2, paragraph 6).

Article 2(1) and (3) of the Convention. Minimum age for admission to employment and age of completion of compulsory schooling. The Committee previously noted that the Education Act No. 12 of 2013 fixed the age of completion of compulsory education at 15 years or until the child completed junior secondary education, whichever was earlier (section 7). It also noted that the Employment and Industrial Relations Code, 2015 (EIRC), which was awaiting entry into force, maintained the minimum age for employment at 14 years (section 115). It consequently requested the Government to consider raising the general minimum age for employment in order to link it with the age of completion of compulsory schooling of 15 years.

The Government indicates that it takes note of this issue and that it will discuss it further with the Decent Work Advisory Board and related bodies in Kiribati, along with the ILO regional Office in Suva. It will provide updated information in its next report. The Committee notes that the EIRC entered into force on 1 November 2016. The Committee hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures to ensure that the minimum age for admission to employment or work is not less than the age of completion of compulsory schooling, in conformity with the Convention. It requests the Government to provide information on the progress made in this regard.

Article 3(2). Determination of types of hazardous work. Regarding the determination of hazardous types of work, the Committee refers to its detailed comments on the application of the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182).

Article 7. Light work. The Committee previously noted that section 116 of the EIRC permitted the employment of children from 12 years of age for light work which is unlikely to be harmful to the health and development of the child; which does not prejudice the child’s school or vocational training attendance; which does not prejudice the child’s ability to benefit from schooling or vocational training; and which complies with the prescribed requirements for light work. The Government indicated that the Ministry of Employment and Human Resource (MEHR) would determine the activities in which light work may be permitted and prescribe the conditions under which the activities may be carried out and the permissible times and hours of work, in accordance with section 116 of the EIRC. The Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures to determine the types of light work permitted.

The Government indicates that a draft list of light work has been developed and is currently under review by the Attorney General’s Office before adoption by the Cabinet.

The Committee notes that, according to the Employment and Industrial Relations Code (Amendment) Act 2017, section 116 has been amended to remove the requirement that light work shall not prejudice the child’s participation in vocational training and the child’s ability to benefit from vocational training. The Committee trusts that the list of light work will be adopted in the near future and will include the number of hours during which and the conditions in which such work may be undertaken. It requests the Government to supply information on the progress made in this regard. The Committee also requests the Government to clarify the reason for the removal of the vocational training elements from section 116 of the EIRC.

Article 9(1). Penalties. The Committee previously noted that contraventions of section 115 of the EIRC on the minimum age for employment and section 117 of the EIRC on the minimum age for hazardous work were punishable by a fine or a term of imprisonment of 12 months, or both (sections 115(6) and 117(4)). It requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of these sections, once the EIRC is in force.

The Government indicates that there is no record of prosecutions or child labour issues currently reported to the Government. It states that, regarding the enforcement of the EIRC, once the lists of light work and hazardous work will be adopted, labour inspectors will have a guidance tool in their inspections concerning child labour. It also states that the high turnover of officers contributes to the weak enforcement of national legislation. The Government specifies in this connection that regional training and workshops on child labour organized by the ILO could prove very fruitful. The Government further indicates that, according to the Ministry of Women, Youth, Sports and Social Affairs, a Child Protection Working Group is being developed, in order to oversee issues relating to child abuse in Kiribati, including exploitation. The group will work closely with the labour inspectors in terms of activities, outreach and information sharing on all forms of child abuse, including children under the minimum age involved in child labour. The Committee encourages the Government to pursue its efforts to combat child labour and to ensure that laws providing for penalties for violations of the minimum age for employment are implemented effectively. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of the penalties provided for in sections 115(6) and 117(4) of the EIRC in practice, indicating the number and nature of violations reported and penalties imposed.

Article 9(3). Keeping of registers. The Committee previously noted that section 119 of the EIRC provided that, for each employee under the age of 18, an employer was required to keep a register containing the child’s name and date of birth.

The Government indicates that it requires employers to submit employment registers along with contracts of employment. It indicates that this obligation is still not being complied with by Kiribati employers. Many employers have not submitted their employment records.

The Committee notes that the Employment and Industrial Relations Code (Amendment) Act 2017 inserts in the EIRC Schedule 6 which sets out the offences that are fixed penalty offences and the penalties that can be issued in fixed penalty notices. Pursuant to Schedule 6, failure to keep a register of child employees under section 119 is punishable by a fine of US$200 for individuals and US$1,000 for companies. The Employment and Industrial Relations Code (Amendment) Act 2017 states that the new provisions on fixed penalty notices aim to sanction and deter employers from breaching the EIRC.

Article 1 of the Convention. National policy for the effective abolition of child labour and application of the Convention in practice. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that a statistical database on the employment of children and young persons, based on Employment Return Forms, was being set up, and that a child labour survey and report, carried out with the ILO-IPEC, were being finalized. The Committee requested the Government to pursue its efforts to both develop a national child labour policy and ensure that sufficient data on the situation of working children in Kiribati was made available.

The Government indicates in its report that it takes note of the Committee’s previous comments regarding the development of a child labour policy and that it will further discuss it with the Decent Work Advisory Board and related technical offices. The Government will provide updated information in its next report.

The Government also indicates that the statistical database on the employment of children and young persons, based on Employment Return Forms, has not been set up due to high turnover within the Ministry, particularly in the Work Relations Unit that deals specifically with the implementation and monitoring of the Employment and Industrial Relations Code, 2015 (EIRC).

The Government indicates that the rapid assessment conducted in Tarawa in 2012 with the ILO-IPEC through its TACKLE programme in Fiji confirms that there are children under the age of 14 working in the informal economy. It specifies that measures or procedures that could accurately describe the situation of children engaged in child labour in Kiribati are still being developed. The Committee notes that the rapid assessment, annexed to the Government’s report, states that there is a clear indication that some children of 12 years of age and below are involved in child labour.

The Committee also notes that according to the Kiribati Social Development Indicator Survey (KSDIS) carried out in 2018–19 by the Kiribati National Statistics Office in collaboration with the Ministry of Health and other government ministries, 28.3 per cent of children aged 5 to 14 years were engaged in child labour. Given the high percentage of children under 14 years of age engaged in child labour, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to develop and adopt a national policy to ensure the progressive elimination of child labour, including in the informal economy. Furthermore, it encourages the Government to pursue its efforts to develop a statistical database including information on the number of children below the minimum age engaged in child labour, and requests the Government to continue to provide information on the number of children engaged in child labour in the country.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

The Committee notes the Government’s first report on the application of the Convention. It also notes that the 2016 amendments to the Annexes of the Convention entered into force for Kiribati on 8 June 2017. The Committee recalls that these amendments aim at aligning the technical requirements of the Convention with the latest standards adopted by the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) with respect to the technology for seafarers’ identity documents (SIDs) provided for in the Convention. In particular, they intend to change the biometric template in SIDs from a fingerprint template in a two-dimensional barcode to a facial image stored in a contactless chip as required by ICAO Document 9303. The Committee notes that, according to the information submitted by the Government, no concrete measures have been taken so far to implement the provisions of the Convention, in particular to issue new SIDs in accordance with the technical requirements of the Convention, as amended in 2016. The Committee recalls in this regard the Resolution adopted by the third meeting of the Special Tripartite Committee of the Maritime Labour Convention, as amended (MLC, 2006), whereby it expressed concern about the difficulties seafarers continue to have in accessing shore leave and transiting in certain ports and terminals around the world and recognized that although an increased number of member States have ratified Convention No. 185, there still appear to be problems in ensuring that the Convention works in the way that it was originally intended. The Committee notes that these problems have dramatically increased as a result of the restrictions imposed by governments around the world to contain the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Committee hopes that the Government in the near future, will adopt the necessary measures to give full effect to all the provisions of the Convention, as amended. It requests the Government to provide detailed information on such measures, including a copy of the applicable national provisions. The Committee further requests the Government to supply a specimen of a SID compliant with the Convention as soon as it becomes available. The Committee reminds the Government of the possibility to avail itself of the Office technical assistance.

Articles 2 to 7 of the Convention. Seafarers’ identity documents (SIDs). Implementation. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that while there are no laws or regulations for issuance of SIDs, the Maritime Act 2017 requires seafarers to obtain a discharge book. This is an eye readable document (normal paper document with personal data) issued by the Marine Division, Ministry of Information and Communication, Transport and Tourism Development. While noting the information provided in relation to discharge books, the Committee requests the Government to adopt the necessary measures to issue SIDs in conformity with the requirements of the Convention.

Article 2(2)(d) of the Convention. Cases of emergency. The Committee previously took due note of the adoption of the Employment and Industrial Relations Code, 2015 (EIRC), providing for new provisions on the limits to work exacted in cases of emergency under section 121(b) and requested the Government to indicate the progress achieved in the implementation of the EIRC, after the Parliament has assented to it. The Committee notes with interest that the Employment and Industrial Relations Code was assented to by the Parliament and that its Part XIV on Forced Labour, which contains section 121(b), entered into force on 1 November 2016.

Article 2(2)(e). Minor communal services. The Committee previously noted that section 121(c) of the EIRC states that forced or compulsory labour does not include “unpaid labour on minor communal works that are reasonably required as part of reasonable and normal communal or civic obligations, provided that members of the community concerned must be consulted in regard to the need for such works, prior to any obligation imposed on a person to undertake them”. The Government indicated that the need for such communal services is decided by the Mwaneaba (Traditional Community Meeting House) system, which determines the members of the community who will be consulted, the tasks to perform and their duration. The Committee requested the Government to indicate the progress achieved in the implementation of the EIRC, after the Parliament has assented to it, and to provide information on the exaction of communal works within the Mwaneaba system.

The Committee notes with interest that the provision of the Employment and Industrial Relations Code on minor communal services entered into force on 1 November 2016. The Government indicates in its report that the type of communal works within the Mwaneaba system can differ from one island to another, depending on the decision of the Unimwane (traditional elders’ authority), but that work such as renovation of the Mwaneaba itself, the welcoming of guests or compulsory Mwaneaba meetings are common throughout all Mwaneabas in Kiribati. Regarding the duration of the work, the Government indicates that it may range from one day to two months, for the renovation and construction of buildings, according to the decision of the Unimwane. These works are not compulsory for the people who choose not to be part of the ownership or membership of that Mwaneaba, but in this case neither are they entitled to the benefits, such as voicing their decisions under the Mwaneaba or sharing the gifts or assistance given to that Mwaneaba. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the type of communal works and their duration within the Mwaneaba system, in its future reports.

Article 25. Penalties for the exactions of forced labour. The Committee previously requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of section 75 of the Employment Ordinance 1998, according to which the exaction of forced or compulsory labour is punishable by life imprisonment and a fine.

The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that there has been no reported cases of forced labour under the Employment Ordinance. The Government further indicates that the Employment Ordinance has been repealed and replaced by the EIRC, which provides for a sentence of imprisonment of 25 years or a fine, or both, for the exaction of forced or compulsory labour (section 122). In this regard, the Committee observes that the Government has reduced the penalty imposed for the exaction of forced labour. Referring to paragraph 319 of the 2012 General Survey on fundamental Conventions, the Committee recalls that, when the sanction may consist only of a fine, it does not constitute an effective sanction in light of the seriousness of the violation and the fact that the sanctions need to be dissuasive. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information on the specific penalties imposed on persons convicted under section 122 of the EIRC in practice.

Article 1 of the Convention. Equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value. Legislative developments and enforcement. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted the adoption of the Employment and Industrial Relations Code (EIRC) in 2015, which repealed the Employment Ordinance, 1977, (Cap. 30). The Committee notes that, like section 75D(1) of the Employment Ordinance, section 114(1) the EIRC provides that “an employer shall pay men and women employees equal remuneration for work of equal value”. It also notes from the Government’s report that this legislation is enforced through scheduled inspections with new inspection procedures and checklist, and that so far there have been no cases of complaints in relation to the Convention. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that no trainings for judges and labour inspectors regarding equal remuneration for work of equal value has been conducted yet. Noting this information, the Committee would like to draw the Government’s attention to the fact that the lack of complaints can indeed indicate a lack of an appropriate legal framework, lack of awareness of rights, lack of confidence in or absence of practical access to procedures, or fear of reprisals. It can also indicate that the system of recording violations is insufficiently developed (see the 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 870). It would also like to recall that as wage discrimination cannot be tackled effectively unless action is taken simultaneously to deal with its sources, it is important to address equal remuneration in the context of the more general rights and protections regarding equality and non-discrimination (see the 2012 General Survey, paragraphs 712–719). The Committee asks the Government to provide detailed information on: (i) the manner in which it ensures the implementation of the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value and, in particular, to describe any actions undertaken to address the gender pay gap and promote equal remuneration in the broader context of gender equality, and to provide information on the new procedures and checklist for labour inspections mentioned above; and (ii) the number of violations detected and fines imposed by labour inspectors, if any, as well as the number of complaints lodged and their outcome. The Committee encourages the Government to take measures to raise awareness among workers, employers and their organizations, of the right of workers to equal remuneration for work of equal value provided by section 114(1) of the EIRC and the Convention, and avenues for dispute resolution. The Committee also encourages the Government to organize and provide appropriate training to labour inspectors and judges in this regard.

Article 2(2). Minimum wage. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the national minimum wage was set at AUD$ 1.3 an hour for local businesses and companies and was implemented on 1 November 2016. The Government states that the minimum wage does not make any distinction based on gender, and that, in Kiribati, the lowest paid are not only confined to women, but also to those – both men and women – who work in more menial jobs. While noting this information, the Committee notes with interest that, pursuant to section 51(g) of the EIRC, the Decent Work Advisory Board has to consider “the right to equal remuneration for work of equal value” when it makes minimum wage recommendations. The Committee asks the Government to provide any available information, disaggregated by sex, on the impact of the adoption of a new minimum wage on the average wages of women and men, and thereby the gender pay gap, and the manner in which it is ensured in practice that, when fixing the minimum wage, the Decent Work Advisory Board takes into account the principle of the Convention.

Article 3. Objective job evaluation. Private and public sectors. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on any measures taken or envisaged to develop and implement objective job evaluation in the public and private sectors. It also requested the Government to indicate how it is ensured that the criteria used to determine the salary scales in the National Conditions of Service are free from gender bias and that male and female workers in the public sector have access to all additional payments – which are part of their remuneration in accordance with the Convention – on an equal footing. The Government indicates that there is no form of job appraisals currently in force in the private sector and that there are no criteria in place ensuring that salary scales for public servants are free from gender bias. It adds that the Public Service Office is working on improving the current job appraisal. In this regard, in 2018, a study has been conducted in the public sector with the aim of eliminating current pay discrepancies, ensuring positions are being remunerated and compensated fairly, and improving the job appraisal in the public sector. The Committee recalls that, when establishing job classification and therefore corresponding salary scales, whatever methods are used for the objective evaluation of jobs, particular care must be taken to ensure that they are free from gender bias: it is important to ensure that the selection of factors for comparison, the weighting of such factors and the actual comparison carried out are not discriminatory, either directly or indirectly. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the fact that often skills considered to be “female”, such as manual dexterity and those required in the caring professions, are undervalued or even overlooked, in comparison with traditionally “male” skills, such as heavy lifting, thereby possibly introducing a gender bias in the classification of jobs (see the 2012 General Survey, paragraph 701). As regards the public sector, the Committee asks the Government to provide information on the findings of the 2018 study to eliminate pay discrepancies in the public sector and their implementation, indicating any improvement made with respect to the method and criteria used as well as any wage adjustments made. Concerning the private sector, the Committee also asks the Government to take steps to develop and implement objective job evaluation methods and provide information in this regard.

Article 4. Cooperation with social partners. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, further to the adoption of the EIRC, the tripartite Decent Work Agenda Steering Committee (DWASC) was replaced by the tripartite Decent Work Advisory Board (DWAB), one of its functions being making recommendations on the implementation of international labour standards. The Committee also notes that, in accordance with section 67(2)(b) of the EIRC, “a collective agreement shall contain ..., if the collective agreement regulates the remuneration rates of employees, a clause providing for equal remuneration for work of equal value for women and men under the collective agreement”. The Committee asks the Government to provide: (i) extracts of collective agreements containing such a clause; and (ii) information on any activities carried out by the social partners, including under the auspices of the Decent Work Advisory Board, regarding the promotion and implementation of the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value.

Statistics. In reply to the Committee’s request for statistics disaggregated by sex on wages in the public and private sectors, the Government indicates that the Ministry is currently undertaking measures to improve its data collection, and cannot provide such information at the moment. Noting this information, the Committee encourages the Government to take the necessary steps to collect and compile data, disaggregated by sex, on the participation of men and women in the labour market and their respective earnings, if possible by sector of economic activity and occupation.

Article 1(d) of the Convention. Penalties of imprisonment involving the obligation to work as punishment for participation in strikes. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication that the Industrial Relations Act, which imposed sanctions of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) for participation in strikes in essential services (section 37), would be repealed and replaced by the Employment and Industrial Relations Code of 2015 (EIRC). The Committee encouraged the Government to pursue its efforts to adopt the new EIRC with a view to addressing the issue of penal sanctions for participation in strikes.

The Committee notes with satisfaction that the Employment and Industrial Relations Code, which entered into force on 1 November 2016, addresses the issue of penal sanctions for participation in strikes. It notes that its section 138, contained in Part XVI on Industrial Action, provides for offences for the violation of an order of the Registrar regarding strikes in essential services. This section does not specify any penalty, however, section 152 provides for a fine for any person who commits an offence under this Code for which no specific penalty is prescribed. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of sections 138 and 152 of the Employment and Industrial Relations Code.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Imposition of penal sanctions involving the obligation to work as a punishment for expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee previously noted that, under sections 46 and 47 of the Prisons Ordinance of 1977, penalties of imprisonment involved an obligation to perform labour. It noted that penalties of imprisonment might be imposed under the following provisions of the Penal Code:

-section 60 (spreading false rumours, whether in writing or by word of mouth or otherwise, tending to create or foster public alarm, anxiety or disaffection, to disturb the public peace, etc.);
-section 66 (uttering any seditious words; printing, publishing, selling, distributing, reproducing or importing any seditious publications);
-section 69(1) (contravening a court order prohibiting the publication of a newspaper);
-sections 70(3) and 78 (failure to deliver a prohibited publication to a police officer); and
-sections 75 and 76 (importing, publishing, selling, distributing, reproducing or possessing a prohibited publication).

The Committee also observed that the Public Order Ordinance of 1977 contained provisions punishing with imprisonment the infringement of various prohibitions concerning meetings, processions, assemblies, flags, and emblems and uniforms in connection with political objects, such as sections 3, 4 and 14. The Committee accordingly requested the Government to take the appropriate measures to bring the above-mentioned provisions of the Penal Code and the Public Order Ordinance into conformity with the Convention, in order to ensure that no sanctions involving compulsory labour can be imposed as a punishment for holding or expressing political views. It also requested the Government to continue to provide information on their application in practice.

The Government indicates that the Decent Work Advisory Board (DWAB) underlined that more consultations with the Office of the Attorney-General and relevant ministries were required to consider amendments that would bring sections 46 and 47 of the Prisons Ordinance in conformity with the Convention. The Committee notes the absence of information in the Government’s report regarding the application in practice of the above provisions.

In respect of the Public Order Ordinance, the Committee notes that, in addition to sections 3, 4 and 14, sections 5, 17, 18 and 20 also provide for penalties of imprisonment for the infringement of prohibitions concerning unlawful societies, public gatherings and unlawful assemblies. The Committee recalls that sanctions involving compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, are incompatible with the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the peaceful expression of non-violent views that are critical of government policy and the established political, social or economic system. Therefore, the Committee firmly hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures without delay to ensure that no sanctions involving compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, may be imposed, in law and in practice, as a punishment for holding or expressing political or ideological views. It requests the Government to provide information on the progress achieved in this regard. In the meantime, it requests the Government to supply information on the application of sections 60, 66, 69(1), 70(3), 75, 76 and 78 of the Penal Code, as well as on sections 3, 4, 5, 14, 17, 18 and 20 of the Public Order Ordinance, including the number and nature of the penalties applied.

Comments adopted by the CEACR: Kiribati

Adopted by the CEACR in 2021

C087 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C098 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C182 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

Follow-up to the conclusions of the Committee on the Application of Standards (International Labour Conference, 109th Session, June 2021)

C182 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

MLC, 2006 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

Adopted by the CEACR in 2020

C138 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C138 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C185 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Adopted by the CEACR in 2019

C029 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C100 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C105 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C105 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Comments adopted by the CEACR: Kiribati

Display the list by:

Adopted by the CEACR in 2021

C087 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C098 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C182 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

Follow-up to the conclusions of the Committee on the Application of Standards (International Labour Conference, 109th Session, June 2021)

C182 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

MLC, 2006 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

Adopted by the CEACR in 2020

C138 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C138 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C185 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Adopted by the CEACR in 2019

C029 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C100 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C105 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C105 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)