Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2024, published 113rd ILC session (2025)

Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144) - Eswatini (Ratification: 1981)

The Committee notes the observations from the Trade Union Congress of Swaziland (TUCOSWA) received on 1 September 2023. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard.

Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention. Criteria for determining the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the Government’s indication that social dialogue processes in the country were mainly affected by the absence of clear criteria for determining the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations. It thus requested the Government to provide updated information on measures to develop such criteria for the purposes of the Convention. In its report, the Government reiterates that the definition of clear criteria for determining the most representative organizations is left to the social partners, who hold their own bilateral discussions on this issue. The Government indicates that the 2019 Memorandum of Understanding between the workers’ federations, TUCOSWA and the Federation of Swaziland Trade Unions (FESWATU), subsists without any changes, while the employers’ federations, the Business Eswatini (BE) and the Federation of Eswatini Business Community (FESBC), are in the process of reviewing their Memorandum of Understanding. In this respect, the Committee wishes to draw the Government’s attention to its General Survey of 2000 on tripartite consultation, paragraph 34, in which it indicated that the Government should endeavour to secure the agreement of all the organizations concerned in establishing the consultative procedures provided for by the Convention, but if this is not possible, it is, as a last resort for the Government to decide, in good faith and in the light of national circumstances, which organizations are to be considered the most representative. If there are two or more organizations of employers or workers which represent a significant body of opinion, even though one of them may be larger than the others, they may all be considered to be “most representative organizations” for the purpose of the Convention. The Committee urges the Government to provide updated information in its next report on developments in relation to this issue, on which conditions the proper implementation of the Convention in the country depends.

Article 5(1). Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee previously noted the Government’s efforts to clarify the respective functions of the Labour Advisory Board (LAB) and the National Steering Committee on Social Dialogue (NSCSD) and requested the Government to report on developments in this regard. The Government indicates that the Ad-Hoc Tripartite Working Committee on Social Dialogue assessed the functions of these bodies and drafted a report to be adopted by LAB. It also indicates that the NSCSD is conducting a self-assessment. Regarding LAB’s functions, the Government reiterates that they entail consultations on all issues under Article 5(1) of the Convention. It also reports that LAB, which must meet four times a year and at the request of six LAB members, held nearly twice as many annual meetings over the past three years in response to demands to adopt various instruments. The Committee nevertheless notes from the Government’s report that the instruments discussed and adopted by LAB do not concern the matters listed under Article 5(1) of the Convention. The Committee notes that, aside from the issue of submissions and consideration of new ratification prospects examined below, the Government has once again not provided the specific information requested on the consultations held to give effect to the Convention. The Committee therefore urges the Government to provide detailed information on the content, frequency and outcome of the tripartite consultations held by the relevant bodies, in particular, LAB, on each of the matters concerning international labour standards covered by Article 5(1) of the Convention. It also requests the Government to keep it informed of its efforts to clarify the mandates of LAB and the NSCSD and, more generally, to strengthen and promote social dialogue.

Article 5(1)(b), (c) and (e). Submission to the competent authorities of adopted ILO instruments. Prospects of ratification of unratified Conventions and proposals for the denunciation of ratified Conventions. The Government indicates in its report that particular attention was paid to the submission to the competent authorities of the instruments adopted by the International Labour Conference at its 99th, 100th, 101st, 103rd, 104th, 106th and 108th Sessions. The Government explains that it failed to honour its obligations previously and that it was called on by LAB to expedite the process. As a result, all pending ILO standards were submitted to the Houses of Parliament and the House of Assembly of Eswatini, on 23 and 25 May 2022, respectively. The Government indicates that, after it availed itself of ILO technical assistance to undertake workshops and gap analyses, the ratification of these instruments was postponed awaiting for the respective gap analyses to be carried out so as to facilitate the consideration of the possible ratifications of the instruments listed in the memorandum of submission as well as other instruments recommended by the Standards Review Mechanism (SRM). It further indicates that concerning: (i) the Violence and Harassment Convention, 2019 (No. 190), the drafting of the report is under way; (ii) the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155), and the Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 2006 (No. 187), the draft report was validated by the social partners; (iii) the Migration for Employment Convention (Revised), 1949 (No. 97), and the Migrant Workers (Supplementary Provisions) Convention, 1975 (No. 143), the gap analysis terms of reference are being finalized with technical support from the International Organization for Migration (IOM). Lastly, it indicates that LAB will provide recommendations on the possible ratification of ILO Conventions prioritized in the Decent Work Country Programme (DWCP) for 2022–25. With regard to the observations of the social partners, the Committee notes that TUCOSWA alleges that the implementation of the 2016 time-bound work plan for the ratification of the Domestic Workers Convention, 2011 (No. 189), has been delayed due to the lack of political will of the Government. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide updated information on the ratification prospects of up-to-date Conventions. Furthermore, taking into account that a time-bound work plan had been agreed by LAB in 2016 to discuss the possible ratification of the Domestic Workers Convention, 2011 (No. 189) and noting the TUCOSWA observations in this regard, the Committee requests the Government to provide information in this respect in its next report.