Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2022, Publicación: 111ª reunión CIT (2023)

Convenio sobre la abolición del trabajo forzoso, 1957 (núm. 105) - Lesotho (Ratificación : 2001)

Impact of compulsory prison labour on the application of Article 1 of the Convention. The Committee previously noted that according to Rule 54(1) of the Prison Rules, work is compulsory for convicted persons and that section 60 of the Correctional Service Regulations Bill requires every inmate sentenced to imprisonment to do useful work for not more than ten hours. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in this respect that compulsory prison labour has the purpose of educating and rehabilitating the inmates. The Committee recalls that compulsory prison labour, even if designed for rehabilitation purposes, has an impact on the application of the Convention when it is imposed with respect to one of the circumstances covered under Article 1 of the Convention. Furthermore, the Committee has also stressed that while convict labour exacted from common offenders is intended to reform or rehabilitate them, the same does not arise in the case of persons convicted for their opinions of for having participated in strikes (2012 General Survey on Fundamental Conventions, paragraph 300). The Committee further notes from the 2020 Government’s report to the Human Rights Committee that the Correctional Service Act, 2016 was enacted (CCPR/C/LSO/2, para. 132). The Committee requests the Government to: (i) indicate if the Correctional Service Regulations Bill has been adopted; and, (ii) to confirm if the Correctional Service Act, 2016, has replaced the Basutoland Prison Proclamation of 1957. If this is the case, please provide a copy of both legislations and indicate the provisions relating to prison labour.

Article 1(a). Penal sanctions involving compulsory prison labour for holding or expressing political or ideological views. The Committee previously noted the following criminal offences contained in the Penal Code Act, 2010 (which, at the discretion of the Court, could be punishable by imprisonment involving compulsory prison labour) that could relate to the expression of political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social, or economic system:

• –section 79 which relates to the act of violating the dignity or injuring the reputation of the Royal Family;
• –section 104 (read together with sections 101 to 103) which relates to the publication of defamatory matters.

The Committee also noted that, pursuant to section 6 (1) (read together with section 6 (3)) of the Public Meetings and Processions Act, 1993, a person who organizes or assists in organizing a meeting, or attends or takes part in a meeting or procession in contravention of a direction or a condition imposed by a police officer, commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine or imprisonment of up to one year.

The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that there are no cases referred to the court of law for contravention of section 79 of the Penal Code Act. Inorder to ascertain that the application of the abovementioned provisions do not lead to the imposition of sanctions involving compulsory labour on persons for the peaceful expression of political views or views opposed to the established system, the Committee requests the Government to: (i) indicate if, as a consequence of the decision of the Constitutional Court of 21 May 2018 that held undesirable to criminalize defamation cases, section 104 of the Penal Code has been replaced; (ii) provide information on the manner in which section 79 of the Penal Code and 6(1) of the Public Meetings and Procession Act are applied in practice, including information on the number of prosecutions initiated, convictions handed down, specific penalties applied and on the facts that led to the convictions.