Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - United Arab Emirates (Ratification: 1997)

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

Article 1(c) of the Convention. Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. The Committee recalls that the Federal Act on Merchant Shipping (No. 26 of 1981) provides for penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour) on seafarers for various breaches of labour discipline (e.g. section 200(a)(c)(g) and (j)); section 204(d); and section 205). The Committee noted the Government’s indication in this regard that the Federal Transport Authority – Land and Maritime was developing a new act to regulate maritime labour in the country and requested the Government to take the necessary measures to bring the above-mentioned provisions into conformity with the Convention, either by repealing sanctions involving compulsory labour or by restricting their application to circumstances in which the ship or the life or health of persons are endangered.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in its report, that it continues to develop its maritime-related legislation and that the legislative bodies have been made aware of the Committee’s comments and will take action as appropriate. The Committee reiterates its previous comments and requests that the Government provides information on the progress made on the development and adoption of the new legislation regulating maritime labour in the country that will ensure compliance with the Convention.

Article 1(d). Sanctions involving compulsory labour for participation in strikes. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 231(1) of the Penal Code of 1987, which provided for sanctions of imprisonment (involving an obligation to work) in cases in which at least three public officials abandon their jobs or voluntarily abstain from performing any obligations related thereto, acting in agreement among themselves or pursuing an illegal objective.

The Committee observes with regret that section 272 of the new Penal Code of 2021 retains this provision, specifying that violation is punishable by incarceration for a period ranging from 6 months to a year. The penalty is increased to incarceration (which can be up to three years, pursuant to section 70) if such leaving or abstaining endanger peoples’ lives, health or security, or causes disturbance among people or disruption to another public interest. In accordance with section 71 of the Penal Code, incarceration is a penalty which restricts the liberty of the person convicted and involves compulsory labour. Therefore, section 272 of the Penal is not in conformity with the Convention, as it would make peaceful participation of public officials in a strike an offence punishable with imprisonment (involving compulsory labour). In this regard, the Committee has continually emphasized that no penal sanctions should be imposed against a worker for having peacefully carried out a strike and thus for merely exercising an essential right, and therefore that measures of imprisonment should not be imposed on any account. Such sanctions could be envisaged only where, during a strike, violence against persons or property has been committed.

The Committee therefore urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that section 272 of the Penal Code is reviewed so that no sanctions involving compulsory labour can be imposed for the mere fact of organizing or peacefully participating in strikes. The Committee also once again requests the Government to provide further information on the application of section 272 of the Penal Code in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.

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

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Penal sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. 1. Law No. 7 on combating terrorism offences of 2014 (Counter-Terrorism Law). The Committee notes that the Counter-Terrorism Law of 2014 contains various provisions that establish a penalty of imprisonment for various “terrorism-related offences”. The Committee notes that penalties of imprisonment involve compulsory labour, pursuant to section 71 of Federal Law-Decree No. 31 of 2021 promulgating the crimes and penalties law (Penal Code) and section 292 of Federal Decree-Law No. 38 of 2022 promulgating the Criminal Procedures Law (Code of Criminal Procedure).

The Committee takes note of a communication dated 13 November 2020 (OL ARE 6/2020), in which United Nations special procedure mandate holders expressed concern over the fact that the wording of the criminal provisions included in the Counter-Terrorism Law was sometimes imprecise and ambiguous, to the point that it might undermine the principle of legal certainty, including as regards the definition of terrorism itself. The special procedure mandate holders expressed concern that the use of ambiguous terms such as “opposing the country”, “influencing the public authorities of the country or another country or international organization”, raise serious concerns with regard to their arbitrary application due to their lack of legal specificity. They also expressed concern about how section 63 of the Counter-Terrorism Law appears to give the Minister of Presidential Affairs significant discretion to label any organization a terrorist entity, without any clear procedure for exercising this power or oversight over it.

The Committee takes note of the opinions issued by the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention on 5 May 2023, concerning the case of 12 Emirati individuals involved in the UAE94 mass trial. This group, consisting of academics, judges, lawyers, students and human rights defenders, were convicted on various counter-terrorism and cybercrime charges in 2013. After completing their sentences, they were subsequently detained in munasaha centres under the Counter-Terrorism Law of 2014, purportedly due to perceived terrorism threats. Among other findings, the Working Group notes that their placement in detention was retroactively based on the implementation of the Counter-Terrorism Law, the provisions of which are vaguely and broadly worded and may have a deterrent effect on the exercise of the rights to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom of opinion and expression, and freedom of peaceful assembly and association. The Working Group also concludes that it appears that the 12 detainees were selected for ongoing incarceration under the Counter-Terrorism Law on the basis of their public activities involving the exercise of their rights to freedom of expression and of assembly, for which they were originally arbitrarily detained.

The Committee notes with concern the reported instances of misuse of the provisions of the Counter-Terrorism Law and observes that individuals convicted under these provisions may face penal sanctions of imprisonment which, as indicated above involve compulsory prison labour. The Committee recalls that, under Article 1(a) of the Convention, no penalty involving compulsory labour may be imposed on persons for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee points out in this respect that the protection provided by the Convention does not extend to persons who use violence, incite to violence or engage in preparatory acts aimed at violence. The Committee also stresses that, while counter-terrorism legislation responds to the legitimate need to protect the security and safety of the population, when drafted in general and broad terms it can become a means of punishing the peaceful exercise of civil rights and liberties, such as the freedom of expression and the right to assembly. The Convention protects these rights and liberties against repression by means of sanctions involving compulsory work.

The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that no penalties involving compulsory labour can be imposed, in application of the Counter-Terrorism Law of 2014, on personswho, without using or advocating violence, express political views or views opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It requests the Government to provide information that would allow the Committee to assess the manner in which the Law is used and interpreted by the competent authorities, including the number of prosecutions, convictions and penalties imposed for committing terrorism-related offences and a description of the facts that led to these convictions.

2. Federal Act No. 15 of 1980 governing publications and publishing. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication that a draft Act regulating media activities was under consideration, which would review Federal Act No. 15 of 1980. In this regard, the Committee recalls that, for a number of years, it has been referring to the following provisions of Federal Act No. 15 of 1980, under which penal sanctions involving compulsory prison labour may be imposed:

• section 70: prohibition on criticizing the Head of State or the rulers of the Emirates;
• section 71: prohibition on publishing documents harmful to Islam, or to the Government, or to the country’s interests or the basic systems on which society is founded;
• section 76: prohibition on publishing material containing information shameful to the Head of State of an Arab or Muslim country or a country with friendly ties, as well as material which may threaten the ties of the country with Arab, Muslim or friendly countries;
• section 77: prohibition on publishing material which causes an injustice to Arabs or constitutes a misrepresentation of Arab civilization or cultural heritage;
• section 81: prohibition on publishing material which harms the national currency or causes confusion over the economic situation of a country.

The Committee notes with regret the lack of information from the Government about any new developments concerning the review of Federal Act No. 15 of 1980.

The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that within the framework of the adoption of the draft Act on media activities or any other legislative review, the above-mentioned provisions will be reviewed in order to ensure that the legislation governing publications and media does not contain provisions that would permit the conviction of, and imposition of penalties of imprisonment on, persons who hold or express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system.

3. Penal Code. Over a number of years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the incompatibility with the Convention of certain provisions of the Penal Code of 1987 which prohibited the establishment of an organization or the convening of a meeting or conference for the purpose of attacking or mistreating the foundations or teachings of the Islamic religion, or calling for the observance of another religion, with such offences being punishable with imprisonment for a maximum period of ten years (sections 317 and 320). The Committee also referred to sections 318 and 319 of the Penal Code pursuant to which a prison sentence could be imposed on any person who is a member of an association specified in section 317, who challenges the foundations or teachings of the Islamic religion, proselytizes another religion or advocates a related ideology.

The Committee notes with regret that the new Penal Code adopted in 2021, under sections 368 and 371, criminalizes the same offences and retains the penalty of imprisonment which involves an obligation to work.

The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to bring sections 368 to 371 of the Penal Code into conformity with the Convention, such as by limiting their scope to acts of violence or incitement to violence. Pending the adoption of such amendments, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of these provisions, including the number of prosecutions and convictions, as well as the facts giving rise to these convictions and the nature of the penalties imposed.

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

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

Article 1(c) of the Convention. Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that under the Federal Act on Merchant Shipping (No. 26 of 1981), penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour) may be imposed on seafarers for various breaches of labour discipline, such as violations of service-related orders, neglecting to serve on vessels or to mount guard, being absent from a vessel without authorization, or any other act that may disrupt order or the service on board (section 200(a)(c)(g) and (j)), refusal to comply with an order concerning work on board the vessel, repeated acts of disobedience (section 204(d) and (e)), or the performance of any acts mentioned in section 204 by more than three persons in agreement (section 205).

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the Federal Transport Authority – Land and Maritime is currently developing a new draft Act to regulate maritime labour in the country so as to keep pace with the country’s position and obligations in the global maritime community in light of its membership of the Council of the International Maritime Organization (IMO). The new draft Act has introduced a set of provisions and amended others, including the section limiting the scope of application of clauses (d) and (e) of section 204 and section 205 to circumstances in which the ship or the life or health of persons are endangered. The Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary measures within the framework of the draft Act regulating maritime labour to bring the above-mentioned provisions into conformity with the Convention, either by repealing sanctions involving compulsory labour or by restricting their application to circumstances in which the ship or the life or health of persons are endangered.

Article 1(d). Sanctions involving compulsory labour for participation in strikes. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 231(1) of the Penal Code, which provides for sanctions of imprisonment (involving an obligation to work) in cases in which at least three public officials abandon their jobs or voluntarily abstain from performing any obligations related thereto, acting in agreement among themselves or pursuing an illegal objective.

The Committee notes the Government’s reiterated indication that the penalty of imprisonment applies only if the strike is likely to endanger the life, health or safety of people or is likely to cause disturbance or dissension among people or if it harms the public interest. The Government also adds that the Committee of Experts’ comments have been forwarded to the relevant legislative authorities and the Committee kept informed accordingly of any developments in this regard. The Committee hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures to ensure that section 231(1) of the Penal Code is reviewed or abrogated, so that no sanctions involving compulsory labour can be imposed for the mere fact of organizing or peacefully participating in strikes. The Committee also requests the Government to provide further information on the application of section 231(1) of the Penal Code in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.

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

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Penal sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. 1. Federal Act No. 15 of 1980. For a number of years, the Committee has been referring to the following provisions of Federal Act No. 15 of 1980 governing publications and publishing, under which penal sanctions involving compulsory prison labour may be imposed (by virtue of sections 86 and 89 of the Penitentiaries Regulations Act No. 43 of 1992), for the violation of the following provisions:

• -section 70: prohibition on criticizing the Head of State or the rulers of the Emirates;
• -section 71: prohibition on publishing documents harmful to Islam, or to the Government, or to the country’s interests or the basic systems on which society is founded;
• -section 76: prohibition on publishing material containing information shameful to the Head of State of an Arab or Muslim country or a country with friendly ties, as well as material which may threaten the ties of the country with Arab, Muslim or friendly countries;
• -section 77: prohibition on publishing material which causes an injustice to Arabs or constitutes a misrepresentation of Arab civilization or cultural heritage;
• -section 81: prohibition on publishing material which harms the national currency or causes confusion over the economic situation of a country.

The Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures to amend the above provisions and to ensure that the ensuing amendments, which would be contained in the draft Act on media activities, would be in conformity with the Convention.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the draft Act regulating media activities is still under consideration and has not been adopted to date. The Committee once again expresses the firm hope that the Government will take the necessary measures to amend or repeal the abovementioned provisions within the framework of the adoption of the draft Act on media activities, in order to ensure that no sanctions involving compulsory labour (including compulsory prison labour), can be imposed for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in the adoption of this draft Act, as well as a copy of the text once adopted.

2. Penal Code. Over a number of years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the incompatibility with the Convention of certain provisions of the Penal Code which prohibit the establishment of an organization or the convening of a meeting or conference for the purpose of attacking or mistreating the foundations or teachings of the Islamic religion, or calling for the observance of another religion, with such offences being punishable with imprisonment for a maximum period of ten years (sections 317 and 320). It also referred to sections 318 and 319 of the Penal Code pursuant to which a prison sentence could be imposed involving an obligation to work, on any person who is a member of an association specified in section 317, who challenges the foundations or teachings of the Islamic religion, proselytizes another religion or advocates a related ideology. The Committee expressed its firm hope that appropriate measures would be taken to bring the above-mentioned sections into conformity with the Convention.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the application of articles 318 and 320 is strictly limited and the number of cases in which the provisions of these articles have been applied are minimal and usually receive a suspended sentence with deportation. In this regard, the Government refers to Criminal Court judgement No. 12311/2002, issued in December 2002 against a certain person. The defendant has been accused of criticizing the principles of the Islamic religion and of possessing and disseminating publications and items offensive to this religion. The Public Prosecution charged him based on sections 318, 320 and 323 of the Penal Code. The person was sentenced to one year’s imprisonment, with deportation from the country. The Government adds that, the penalty of imprisonment was not applied in practice, and the Court settled for the deportation of the accused from the country on condition that he did not commit the same offence on the territory of the country within the next three years.

The Committee observes that, although the penalty of imprisonment was not applied in practice for this case, this does not imply an exemption of its application in other similar cases, as long as sections 317-320 of the Penal Code provide for sanctions of imprisonment, involving an obligation to work. The Committee, therefore, once again expresses its firm hope that appropriate measures will be taken to bring sections 317–320 of the Penal Code into conformity with the Convention, for example, by limiting their scope to acts of violence or incitement to violence or by replacing sanctions involving compulsory labour with other kinds of sanctions, (such as fines) and that the Government will soon be in a position to report on the progress made in this regard. Pending the adoption of such amendments, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of sections 317–320, including copies of any relevant court decisions, and indicating the penalties imposed and the facts giving rise to the convictions.

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

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

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 1(c) of the Convention. Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that under the Federal Law on Merchant Shipping (No. 26 of 1981), penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour) may be imposed on seafarers for various breaches of labour discipline, such as violations of service-related orders, neglecting to serve on vessels or to mount guard, being absent from a vessel without authorization, or any other act that may disrupt order or the service on board (section 200(a)(c)(g) and (j)), refusal to comply with an order concerning work on board the vessel, repeated acts of disobedience (section 204(d) and (e)), or the performance of any acts mentioned in section 204 by more than three persons in agreement (section 205).

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that according to section 200 of Federal Law No. 26 of 1981 on Merchant Shipping, any member of the vessel’s crew who commits any of the offences mentioned in this section shall be sentenced to detention and not imprisonment for a period varying from one day to thirty days or a fine which amounts to one day’s pay, or that of 30 days, or to both. This category of prisoners who are sentenced to detention may not work unless it is upon their request. The Committee takes due note of this information.

Regarding the penalty of imprisonment specified in sections 204 and 205, the Committee notes the Government’s explanation that such penalties are imposed on seafarers who commit any of the violations specified in the abovementioned sections, which are few acts exceeding the level of contravention which do not endanger the vessel or the life of persons.

The Committee points out that section 204(d) and (e) (refusal to comply with an order concerning work on board the vessel, repeated acts of disobedience), as well as section 205 (the performance of any acts mentioned in section 204 by more than three persons in agreement), are worded in terms broad enough to lend themselves to application as a means of punishment for labour discipline, and in so far as they are enforceable with sanctions of imprisonment involving compulsory labour, they are incompatible with the Convention.

Therefore, the Committee once again reiterates its hope that the necessary measures will be taken to bring the abovementioned provisions into conformity with the Convention by limiting their scope to circumstances in which the ship or the life or health of persons are endangered.

Article 1(d). Sanctions involving compulsory labour for having participated in strikes. In its earlier comments, the Committee had referred to section 231(1) of the Penal Code which provides for sanctions of imprisonment (involving an obligation to work) in cases in which at least three public officials abandon their jobs or voluntarily abstain from performing any obligations related thereto, acting in agreement among themselves or pursuing an illegal objective.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that pursuant to section 231(2) of the Penal Code, the penalty of imprisonment applies only if the strike is likely to endanger the life, health, or safety of people or is likely to cause disturbance or dissension among the people or if it harms the public interest. The Government also adds that no sentence of imprisonment is imposed on any person who has participated peacefully in a strike. The penalty imposed is that for a misdemeanour, and only applied if the strike endangers the life, health, or safety of the people or causes disturbance among citizens.

However, the Committee notes that section 231(1) of the Penal Code is worded in such manner that it provides for sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year in cases in which at least three public officials abandon their jobs or voluntarily abstain from performing any obligations related thereto, acting in agreement among themselves or pursuing an illegal objective. Such a provision is not in conformity with the Convention, since it makes any strikes in the public service illegal and punishable with imprisonment (which involves compulsory labour).

The Committee therefore recalls, once again, that no one who has participated in a strike should be subject to penal sanctions for the mere fact of peacefully participating in a strike and in no event should be subject to a prison sentence involving compulsory labour.

In the light of the above considerations, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that section 231(1) of the Penal Code is reviewed or abrogated, so that no sanctions involving compulsory labour can be imposed for the mere fact of organizing or peacefully participating in strikes. The Committee also requests the Government to provide in its next report further information on the application of section 231(1) of the Penal Code in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.

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

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Penal sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. 1. Federal Law No. 15 of 1980. For a number of years, the Committee has been referring to the following provisions of Federal Law No. 15 of 1980 governing publications and publishing, under which penal sanctions involving compulsory prison labour may be imposed (by virtue of sections 86 and 89 of the Penitentiaries Regulations Act No. 43 of 1992), for the violation of the following provisions:

• -section 70: prohibition on criticizing the Head of State or the rulers of the Emirates;
• -section 71: prohibition on publishing documents harmful to Islam, or to the Government, or to the country’s interests or the basic systems on which society is founded;
• -section 76: prohibition on publishing material containing information shameful to the Head of State of an Arab or Muslim country or a country with friendly ties, as well as material which may threaten the ties of the country with Arab, Muslim or friendly countries;
• -section 77: prohibition on publishing material which causes an injustice to Arabs or constitutes a misrepresentation of Arab civilization or cultural heritage;
• -section 81: prohibition on publishing material which harms the national currency or causes confusion over the economic situation of a country.

The Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures to bring the draft law on media activities into conformity with the Convention.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the draft law regulating media activities is still undergoing some legislative and constitutional procedures and a copy of the law will be provided when it is adopted. The Government also adds that the new draft law includes the following guarantees: (i) freedom of opinion and expression, whether reflected orally or by any other means; (ii) no censorship on the authorized media should be imposed; and (iii) no sanctions of forced labour can be imposed in cases of expressing political views opposed to the economic, political or social system. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the Government will take the necessary measures to repeal the abovementioned provisions within the framework of the adoption of the draft law on media activities, in order to ensure that no sanctions involving compulsory labour (including compulsory prison labour), can be imposed for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in the adoption of this draft law, as well as a copy of the text once adopted.

2. Penal Code. Over a number of years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the incompatibility with the Convention of certain provisions of the Penal Code which prohibit the establishment of an organization or the convening of a meeting or conference for the purpose of attacking or mistreating the foundations or teachings of the Islamic religion, or calling for the observance of another religion, with such offences being punishable with imprisonment for a maximum period of ten years (sections 317 and 320). It also referred to sections 318 and 319 of the Penal Code pursuant to which a prison sentence could be imposed involving an obligation to work, on any person who is a member of an association specified in section 317, who challenges the foundations or teachings of the Islamic religion, proselytizes another religion or advocates a related ideology. The Committee expressed its firm hope that appropriate measures would be taken to bring the abovementioned sections into conformity with the Convention.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that convicted persons benefit from the right to work with an adequate salary and in decent working conditions, in order to help them in their rehabilitation process. The Government also refers the Penitentiaries Regulations Act No. 43 of 1992 indicating that it does not include an obligation of employing specific categories of prisoners, as any person sentenced to a penalty which deprives him of his liberty carries out work for the purpose of rehabilitation. The Government finally states that there are no court decisions with regard to the application of sections 317–320 of the Penal Code.

Referring to its 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, the Committee points out that in the great majority of cases, labour imposed on persons as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law will have no relevance on the application of the Convention, such as in the cases of the exaction of compulsory labour from common offenders convicted, for example, of robbery, kidnapping or other acts of violence or of having endangered the life or health of others, or numerous other offences. However, if a person is required to perform compulsory prison labour because she or he has expressed particular political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political and social system, the situation is covered by the Convention, which prohibits the use “of any form of compulsory labour” (including compulsory prison labour) as a sanction, as a means of coercion, education or discipline, or as a punishment within the meaning of Article 1(a) of the Convention (paragraph 300). In this regard, the Committee, once again expresses its firm hope that appropriate measures will be taken to bring sections 317–320 of the Penal Code into conformity with the Convention and that, pending the adoption of such measures, the Government will provide information on the application of sections 317–320 in practice, including copies of any relevant court decisions, and indicating the penalties imposed and the facts giving rise to the convictions.

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Article 1(c) of the Convention. Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that under the Federal Law on Merchant Shipping (No. 26 of 1981), penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour) may be imposed on seafarers for various breaches of labour discipline, such as violations of service-related orders, neglecting to serve on vessels or to mount guard, being absent from a vessel without authorization, or any other act that may disrupt order or the service on board (section 200(a)(c)(g) and (j)), refusal to comply with an order concerning work on board the vessel, repeated acts of disobedience (section 204(d) and (e)), or the performance of any acts mentioned in section 204 by more than three persons in agreement (section 205).

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that according to section 200 of Federal Law No. 26 of 1981 on Merchant Shipping, any member of the vessel’s crew who commits any of the offences mentioned in this section shall be sentenced to detention and not imprisonment for a period varying from one day to thirty days or a fine which amounts to one day’s pay, or that of 30 days, or to both. This category of prisoners who are sentenced to detention may not work unless it is upon their request. The Committee takes due note of this information.

Regarding the penalty of imprisonment specified in sections 204 and 205, the Committee notes the Government’s explanation that such penalties are imposed on seafarers who commit any of the violations specified in the abovementioned sections, which are few acts exceeding the level of contravention which do not endanger the vessel or the life of persons.

The Committee points out that section 204(d) and (e) (refusal to comply with an order concerning work on board the vessel, repeated acts of disobedience), as well as section 205 (the performance of any acts mentioned in section 204 by more than three persons in agreement), are worded in terms broad enough to lend themselves to application as a means of punishment for labour discipline, and in so far as they are enforceable with sanctions of imprisonment involving compulsory labour, they are incompatible with the Convention.

Therefore, the Committee once again reiterates its hope that the necessary measures will be taken to bring the abovementioned provisions into conformity with the Convention by limiting their scope to circumstances in which the ship or the life or health of persons are endangered.

Article 1(d). Sanctions involving compulsory labour for having participated in strikes. In its earlier comments, the Committee had referred to section 231(1) of the Penal Code which provides for sanctions of imprisonment (involving an obligation to work) in cases in which at least three public officials abandon their jobs or voluntarily abstain from performing any obligations related thereto, acting in agreement among themselves or pursuing an illegal objective.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that pursuant to section 231(2) of the Penal Code, the penalty of imprisonment applies only if the strike is likely to endanger the life, health, or safety of people or is likely to cause disturbance or dissension among the people or if it harms the public interest. The Government also adds that no sentence of imprisonment is imposed on any person who has participated peacefully in a strike. The penalty imposed is that for a misdemeanour, and only applied if the strike endangers the life, health, or safety of the people or causes disturbance among citizens.

However, the Committee notes that section 231(1) of the Penal Code is worded in such manner that it provides for sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year in cases in which at least three public officials abandon their jobs or voluntarily abstain from performing any obligations related thereto, acting in agreement among themselves or pursuing an illegal objective. Such a provision is not in conformity with the Convention, since it makes any strikes in the public service illegal and punishable with imprisonment (which involves compulsory labour).

The Committee therefore recalls, once again, that no one who has participated in a strike should be subject to penal sanctions for the mere fact of peacefully participating in a strike and in no event should be subject to a prison sentence involving compulsory labour.

In the light of the above considerations, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that section 231(1) of the Penal Code is reviewed or abrogated, so that no sanctions involving compulsory labour can be imposed for the mere fact of organizing or peacefully participating in strikes. The Committee also requests the Government to provide in its next report further information on the application of section 231(1) of the Penal Code in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Penalties involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views. 1. Federal Law No. 15 of 1980. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that Federal Law No. 15 of 1980 governing publications and publishing imposes penal sanctions of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) in accordance with sections 86 and 89 of the Law, for the violation of the following provisions:

• -section 70: prohibition upon criticizing the Head of State of the Republic or the rulers of the Emirates;
• -section 71: prohibition on publishing documents harmful to Islam, or to the Government, or to the country’s interests or the basic systems on which society is founded;
• -section 76: prohibition on publishing material containing information shameful to the Head of State of an Arab or Muslim country or a country with friendly ties, as well as material which may threaten the ties of the country with Arab, Muslim or friendly countries;
• -section 77: prohibition on publishing material which causes an injustice to Arabs or constitutes a misrepresentation of Arab civilization or cultural heritage;
• -section 81: prohibition on publishing material which harms the national currency or causes confusion over the economic situation of a country.

The Committee observes that the application of these provisions is not limited to acts of violence (or incitement to violence), armed resistance or uprising, but allows punishment involving the obligation to work to be imposed for the peaceful expression of opinions contrary to the Government’s policy and the established political system. In this regard, with reference to its 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions concerning rights at work, the Committee recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour “as a means of political coercion or as a punishment for holding political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social and economic system”. While the Convention does not prohibit punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence, incite to violence or engage in preparatory acts aimed at violence, sanctions of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) are not in conformity with the Convention if they enforce a prohibition of the expression of views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system (paragraphs 302–303).

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the draft law regulating media activities is currently in the last stage prior to promulgation. Section 2 of this draft law specifies that freedom of opinion and expression, whether reflected orally or by any other means, is guaranteed by the law. The Committee also notes that Chapter 6 of the draft law lays down financial penalties in case of a violation of any provision and does not include any penalties which restrict or deprive freedom. Lastly, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the draft law will repeal, in sections 31 and 32, the penalty of imprisonment specified for the violation of the abovementioned provisions of Federal Law No. 15 of 1980 on publications and publishing.

The Committee accordingly hopes that within the framework of the adoption of the draft law on media activities, the Government will take the necessary measures to ensure that no sanctions involving compulsory labour can be imposed for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in the adoption of this draft law, as well as a copy of the text once adopted.

2. Penal Code. Over a number of years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the incompatibility with the Convention of certain provisions of the Penal Code which prohibit the establishment of an organization or the convening of a meeting or conference for the purpose of attacking or mistreating the foundations or teachings of the Islamic religion, or calling for the observance of another religion, with such offences being punishable with imprisonment for a maximum period of ten years (sections 317 and 320). It also referred to sections 318 and 319 of the Penal Code pursuant to which a prison sentence could be imposed involving an obligation to work, on any person who is a member of an association specified in section 317, who challenges the foundations or teachings of the Islamic religion, proselytizes another religion or advocates a related ideology.

The Committee notes the Government’s detailed explanations on the purpose of employing convicted persons referred to in Law No. 43 of 1992, which regulates penitentiaries. The Government indicates that the law does not include an obligation of employing a specific category of prisoners, as any person sentenced to a penalty which deprives him of his liberty carries out work for the purpose of rehabilitation.

The Committee recalls that in the great majority of cases, labour imposed on persons as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law will have no relevance on the application of the Convention, such as in the cases of the exaction of compulsory labour from common offenders convicted, for example, of robbery, kidnapping or other acts of violence or of having endangered the life or health of others, or numerous other offences. However, if a person is required to perform compulsory prison labour following a conviction under sections 317 and 320 for the holding or expression of certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political and social system, the situation is incompatible with the Convention which prohibits the imposition of any form of forced or compulsory labour as a sanction in these circumstances.

The Committee therefore once again expresses its firm hope that appropriate measures will be taken to bring sections 317–320 of the Penal Code into conformity with the Convention and that, pending the adoption of such measures, the Government will provide information on the application of sections 317–320 in practice, including copies of any relevant court decisions, indicating the penalties imposed.

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

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

Preliminary remarks concerning the impact of compulsory prison labour on the application of the Convention. Over a number of years, the Committee has been referring to certain provisions of the national legislation, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour) may be imposed in circumstances falling under Article 1(a),(c) and (d) of the Convention. It noted the Government’s repeated explications that all the provisions in question refer only to sanctions of imprisonment, without mentioning forced labour as a penalty.

The Committee once again takes note of these indications, as well as the Government’s reference to the definition of forced labour contained in Article 2(1) of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29). In this regard, the Committee once again draws the Government’s attention to the explanations provided in paragraphs 144–147 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour, according to which, in the great majority of cases, labour imposed on persons as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law will have no relevance to the application of Convention No. 105, such as in the cases of the exaction of compulsory labour from common offenders convicted, for example, of robbery, kidnapping or other acts of violence or of having endangered the life or health of others, or numerous other offences.

However, the Committee emphasizes that if a person is required to perform compulsory prison labour because that person holds or has expressed certain political views, has committed a breach of labour discipline, or has participated in a strike, the situation is covered by the Convention which, prohibits the use “of any form” of forced or compulsory labour as a sanction in these circumstances.

Article 1(a). Political coercion and punishment for holding or expressing political or ideological views. Following its previous comments, the Committee takes due note that Federal Law No. 6 of 1974 on non profit-making organizations has been repealed by Federal Law No. 2 of 2008 on non-profit-making associations and organizations, which annuls the penalty of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour) to persons who violate the provisions of Law No. 6 of 1974 and replaces it by financial penalties (section 57).

In its previous comments, the Committee noted that Federal Law No. 15 of 1980 governing publications and publishing imposes penal sanctions of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) in accordance with sections 86 and 89 of the Law, for the violation of the following provisions of the law:

• -section 70: prohibition upon criticizing the President of the Republic or the rulers of the Emirates;
• -section 71: prohibition on publishing documents harmful to Islam, or to the Government, or to the country’s interests or the basic systems on which society is founded;
• -section 76: prohibition on publishing material containing information shameful to the President of an Arab or Muslim country or a country with friendly ties, as well as material which may threaten the ties of the country with Arab, Muslim or friendly countries;
• -section 77: prohibition on publishing material which causes an injustice to Arabs or constitutes a misrepresentation of Arab civilization or cultural heritage;
• -section 81: prohibition on publishing material which harms the national currency or causes confusion over the economic situation of a country.

The Committee recalls that limitations may be imposed by law on individual rights and freedoms in order to ensure respect of the rights and freedoms of others and to meet the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society (such as, for example, laws on defamation, sedition and subversion, public order and security). But where the restrictions of these rights and freedoms are formulated in such wide and general terms that they may lead to the imposition of penalties involving compulsory labour as punishment for the expression of political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, it falls within the scope of the Convention (paragraph 153 of its 2007 General Survey).

In the light of the above considerations, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that Federal Law No. 15 of 1980 is reviewed or abrogated, so that no sanctions involving compulsory labour can be imposed for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system.

Regarding the promulgation on 24 September 2007 of a Decree prohibiting the imprisonment of journalists in judicial cases related to publications, freedom of expression or the exercise of their occupation, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that the abovementioned Decree is currently in force before the State courts, and based on it, a draft bill (dated 2009 and annexed to the Government’s report), concerning the regulation of mass media activities, is currently in the process of adoption. Section 2 of this draft bill specifies that freedom of opinion and expression whether reflected orally or by any other means is guaranteed by the law. The Committee also notes that Chapter 6 of the draft bill lays down financial penalties in case of a violation of any provision and does not include any penalties which restrict or deprive freedom. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in the adoption of the draft bill of 2009, as well as a copy of the text once adopted.

Over a number of years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the incompatibility with the Convention of certain provisions of the Penal Code which prohibit the establishment of an organization or the convening of a meeting or conference for the purpose of attacking or mistreating the foundations or teachings of the Islamic religion, or calling for the observance of another religion, with such offences being punishable with imprisonment for a maximum period of ten years (sections 317 and 320). It also referred to sections 318 and 319 of the Penal Code which might impose a prison sentence, involving an obligation to work, on any person who is a member of an association specified in section 317, who challenges the foundations or teachings of the Islamic religion, proselytizes another religion or advocates a related ideology.

The Committee notes that the Government’s report contains no information regarding this point. The Committee recalls that sanctions involving compulsory labour fall within the scope of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the expression of views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system, whether such prohibition is imposed by law or by a discretionary administrative decision (paragraph 154 of its 2007 General Survey).

The Committee therefore once again expresses its firm hope that appropriate measures will be taken to bring sections 317–320 of the Penal Code into conformity with the Convention and that, pending the adoption of such measures, the Government will provide information on the application of sections 317–320 in practice, including copies of any relevant court decisions, indicating the penalties imposed.

Article 1(c). Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that under the Federal Law on Merchant Shipping (No. 26 of 1981), penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour) may be imposed on seafarers for various breaches of labour discipline, such as violation of service-related orders, neglecting to serve on vessels or to mount guard, being absent from a vessel without authorization, or any other act that may disrupt order or the service on board (section 200(a)(c)(g) and (j)), refusal to comply with an order concerning work on board the vessel, repeated acts of disobedience (section 204(d) and (e)), or the performance of any acts mentioned in section 204 by more than three persons in agreement (section 205).

The Committee points out once again that Article 1(c) of the Convention prohibits the use of compulsory labour as a means of labour discipline, and that sanctions involving compulsory labour for breaches of labour discipline, such as desertion, absence without leave or disobedience, are not in conformity with the Convention, unless the acts committed were liable to endanger the ship or the life or health of persons (paragraph 179 of its 2007 General Survey).

Noting that the Government’s report does not contain relevant information on these matters, the Committee once again reiterates its hope that the necessary measures will be taken to bring the abovementioned provisions into conformity with the Convention by limiting their scope to circumstances in which the ship or the life or health of persons are endangered.

Article 1(d). Punishment for having participated in strikes. In its earlier comments, the Committee had referred to section 231(1) of the Penal Code which provides for sanctions of imprisonment (involving an obligation to work) in cases in which at least three public officials abandon their jobs or voluntarily abstain from performing any obligations related thereto, acting in agreement among themselves or pursuing an illegal objective.

The Committee notes the Government’s detailed explanations in its report. It however, observes that the Government’s report contain no relevant information on how the abovementioned provision is applied in practice. The Committee recalls, once again, that no one who has participated in a strike should be subject to penal sanctions for the mere fact of peacefully participating in a strike and in no event should risk a prison sentence involving compulsory labour.

The Committee hopes that the Government will provide in its next report further information on the application of section 231(1) of the Penal Code in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.

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

Compulsory prison labour. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, under section 70 of the Penal Code, a convicted person serving a sentence of imprisonment is under the obligation to perform work as prescribed in the prison. It also noted that, under section 24 of the Federal Act on the organization of prison establishments (No. 43 of 1992), prisoners in category “C” (those imprisoned for a specified term or for life) are required to work on tasks specified by the by-laws of the prison and entitled to receive remuneration (the tasks on which prisoners may be employed being specified in Chapter 3 of Ministerial Decree No. 471 of 1995).

The Committee notes the Government’s detailed explanations concerning the application of the legal provisions envisaging sentences of imprisonment. The Government refers to the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, adopted by the United Nations in 1955, which the Government used as inspiration for Act No. 43/1992 on the organization of prison establishments, and which guarantee the right to work of prisoners in return for a wage and in compliance with working hours. The Government confirms that, by virtue of section 70 of the Penal Code, any convicted person serving a prison sentence should be allocated specific work to perform in prisons, under specific conditions, with an indication of the objective of such work, which is not the punishment of the prisoner, but rehabilitation.

While noting these indications, the Committee once again draws the Government’s attention to the explanations provided in paragraphs 144–147 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour, according to which, in the great majority of cases, labour imposed on persons as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law will have no relevance to the application of Convention No. 105, such as in the cases of the exaction of forced or compulsory labour from common offenders convicted, for example, of robbery, kidnapping or other acts of violence or of having endangered the life or health of others, or numerous other offences. However, if a person is required to perform compulsory prison labour because that person holds or has expressed certain political views, has committed a breach of labour discipline, or has participated in a strike, the situation is covered by the Convention which, in addition, prohibits the use “of any form” of forced or compulsory labour as a sanction, as a means of coercion, education or discipline, or as a punishment in respect of the persons within the scope of Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention.

Article 1(a). Political coercion and punishment for holding or expressing political or ideological views. The Committee noted previously that, under Federal Law No. 15 of 1980 governing publications and publishing, penal sanctions of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) can be imposed, in accordance with sections 86 and 89 of the Law, for the violation of the following provisions of the Law:

–      section 70: prohibition upon criticizing the President of the Republic or the rulers of the Emirates;

–      section 71: prohibition on publishing documents harmful to Islam, or to the Government, or to the country’s interests or the basic systems on which society is founded;

–      section 76: prohibition on publishing material containing information shameful to the President of an Arab or Muslim country or a country with friendly ties, as well as material which may threaten the ties of the country with Arab, Muslim or friendly countries;

–      section 77: prohibition on publishing material which causes an injustice to Arabs or constitutes a misrepresentation of Arab civilization or cultural heritage;

–      section 81: prohibition on publishing material which harms the national currency or causes confusion over the economic situation of a country.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that a Decree was promulgated on 24 September 2007 prohibiting the imprisonment of journalists in judicial cases related to publication, freedom of expression or the exercise of their occupation. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide a copy of the above Decree so as to enable the Committee to ascertain its conformity with the Convention. Please also provide information on the consequences of this legislation in practice.

In its previous comments, the Committee noted that certain provisions of the Penal Code prohibit the establishment of an organization or the convening of a meeting or conference for the purpose of attacking or mistreating the foundations or teachings of the Islamic religion, or calling for the observance of another religion, with such offences being punishable with imprisonment for a maximum period of ten years (sections 317 and 320). It also noted that sections 318 and 319 of the Penal Code provide that a prison sentence involving an obligation to work may be imposed on any person who is a member of an association specified in section 317, who challenges the foundations or teachings of the Islamic religion, proselytizes another religion or advocates a related ideology. The Committee therefore reiterates its hope that appropriate measures will be taken to bring sections 317 to 320 of the Penal Code into conformity with the Convention and that, pending the adoption of such measures, the Government will provide information on the application of sections 317 to 320 in practice, including copies of any relevant court decisions, indicating the penalties imposed.

The Committee previously noted that, under the terms of section 41 of Federal Law No. 6 of 1974, on non-profit-making organizations, any violation of the provisions of the Law is punishable with imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of section 41, supplying copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.

Article 1(c). Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. The Committee previously noted that under the Federal Law on Merchant Shipping (No. 26 of 1981), penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour) may be imposed on seafarers for various breaches of labour discipline, such as violation of service-related orders, neglecting to serve on vessels or to mount guard, being absent from a vessel without authorization, or any other act that may disrupt order or the service on board (section 200(a)(c)(g) and (j)), refusal to comply with an order concerning work on board the vessel, repeated acts of disobedience (section 204(d) and (e)), or the performance of any acts mentioned in section 204 by more than three persons in agreement (section 205).

The Committee recalled, with reference to the explanations provided in paragraph 179 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour, that Article 1(c) of the Convention prohibits the use of compulsory labour as a means of labour discipline. The Committee emphasized that the Convention does not cover sanctions relating to acts liable to endanger the ship or the life or health of persons (such as, for example, the sanctions of imprisonment provided for in section 209 of the Federal Law on Merchant Shipping punishing acts that damage a vessel or jeopardize the lives of persons on board). However, with regard to sanctions relating more generally to breaches of labour discipline, such as desertion, absence without leave or disobedience, such sanctions fall within the scope of the Convention. Noting that the Government’s report does not contain relevant information on these matters, the Committee once again invites it to take the necessary measures to bring these provisions into conformity with the Convention by limiting their scope to circumstances in which the ship or the life or health of persons are endangered.

Article 1(d). Punishment for having participated in strikes. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 231(1) of the Penal Code provides for sanctions of imprisonment (involving an obligation to work) in cases in which at least three public officials abandon their jobs or voluntarily abstain from performing any obligations related thereto, acting in agreement amongst themselves or pursuing an illegal objective. The Committee recalls, with reference to the explanations provided in paragraph 189 of its General Survey referred to above, that no one who has participated in a peaceful strike should be subject to penal sanctions and in no event should risk a prison sentence. While noting that the Government’s report does not contain relevant information on these matters, the Committee reiterates its request to the Government to provide information on the application of this provision in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.

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

Compulsory prison labour

In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to certain provisions of the national legislation, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour) may be imposed in circumstances falling under Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. The Committee has noted the Government’s repeated indications that all the provisions in question refer exclusively to sanctions of imprisonment and fines, without mentioning forced labour as a penalty.

However, the Committee previously noted that, under section 70 of the Penal Code, a convicted person serving a sentence of deprivation of liberty is under obligation to perform works as prescribed in the penitentiary institution. It also noted that, under section 24 of the Federal Act on the organization of prison establishments (No. 43 of 1992), prisoners of category “c” (those imprisoned for a specified term or for life) are to be employed in tasks specified by the prison’s by-laws and are entitled to receive remuneration (the tasks in which prisoners may be employed being specified in Chapter 3 of Ministerial Decree No. 471 of 1995).

The Committee points out once again, referring also to the explanations provided in paragraphs 144–147 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, that any sanction involving compulsory labour, including prison sentences involving an obligation to work, are covered by the Convention, in so far as they are imposed in the five cases specified by this instrument.

The Committee therefore hopes that the Government’s next report will contain full information on the following matters raised in its previous direct request:

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Political coercion and punishment for holding or expressing political or ideological views. 1. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to the Penal Code provisions prohibiting the establishment of an organization or convening a meeting or conference for the purpose of fighting or mistreating the foundations or teachings of the Islamic religion or calling for the observance of another religion, these offences being punishable with imprisonment for a term of up to ten years (sections 317 and 320). The Committee also referred to the provisions of sections 318 and 319 of the Penal Code, which make punishable with imprisonment any person who is a member of an association specified in section 317 or who fights the foundations or teachings of the Islamic religion or proselytizes other religions, or calls for an idea or ideology which includes any of the above. As indicated above, sanctions of imprisonment involve an obligation to perform labour.

The Committee recalled that Article 1(a) prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It refers to the explanations contained in paragraph 154 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, in which it had observed that the Convention prohibits neither punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence, incite to violence or engage in preparatory acts aimed at violence, nor judicial imposition of certain restrictions on persons convicted of crimes of that kind. But sanctions involving compulsory labour fall within the scope of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the expression of views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system. The freedom of expression of political or ideological views may be equally restricted by way of prohibition of various kinds of meetings or associations, which is also contrary to the Convention, if such prohibition is enforced by sanctions involving compulsory labour.

The Committee therefore reiterates its hope that appropriate measures will be taken in order to bring sections 317–320 of the Penal Code into conformity with the Convention, and that, pending the adoption of such measures, the Government will provide information on the application of sections 317–320 in practice, including copies of any court decisions and indicating the penalties imposed.

2. The Committee previously noted that, under Federal Law No. 15 of 1980 governing publications and publishing, penal sanctions of imprisonment (which involves compulsory labour, as indicated above) can be imposed, in accordance with sections 86 and 89 of the Law, for the violation of the following provisions of the Law:

–      section 70 (prohibition to criticize the President of the Republic or the rulers of the Emirates);

–      section 71 (prohibition to publish any material harmful to Islam, or to the Government, or to the country’s interests or the basic systems on which the society is founded);

–      section 76 (prohibition to publish material containing shameful information on the President of an Arab, Muslim country or a country with friendly ties, as well as material which may threaten the ties of the country with Arab, Muslim or friendly countries);

–      section 77 (prohibition to publish material which causes an injustice to Arabs or constitutes a misrepresentation of Arab civilization or heritage);

–      section 81 (prohibition to publish material which harms the national currency or causes a confusion over the economic situation in a country).

Referring to the explanations contained in paragraph 153 of the abovementioned General Survey, the Committee observes that limitations may be imposed by law on individual rights and freedoms in order to ensure respect of the rights and freedoms of others and to meet the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society (such as, for example, laws on defamation, sedition and subversion, public order and security). But where the restrictions of these rights and freedoms are formulated in such wide and general terms that they may lead to the imposition of penalties involving compulsory labour as punishment for the expression of political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, it falls within the scope of the Convention.

The Committee therefore reiterates its hope that the above provisions of Federal Law No. 15 of 1980 will be reviewed in the light of these considerations, so that no sanctions involving forced or compulsory labour could be imposed for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. Noting also the Government’s indications in the report that the above provisions have never been applied in practice, and that no decisions and regulations have yet been issued for the implementation of this Law, the Committee requests the Government to supply copies of any such decisions and regulations, to which reference is made in section 107, as soon as they are adopted.

3. The Committee previously noted that, under section 41 of the Federal Law on non-profit organizations (No. 6 of 1974), any violation of the provisions of this Law is punishable with imprisonment (which involves compulsory prison labour). The Committee repeats its requests for information on the application of section 41 in practice, as well as for copies of court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.

Article 1(c). Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. The Committee previously noted the provisions of the Federal Law on Merchant Shipping (No. 26 of 1981), under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour) may be imposed on seafarers for various breaches of labour discipline, such as violation of service‑related orders, neglecting to serve on vessels or in mounting guard, being absent from a vessel without an authorization, or any other act that may disrupt order or the service on board (section 200(a), (c), (g) and (j)), refusal to observe an order concerning work on board the vessel, repeated acts of disobedience (section 204(d) and (e)), or performance of any acts mentioned in section 204 by more than three persons in agreement (section 205).

The Committee recalled that Article 1(c) prohibits the use of compulsory labour as a means of labour discipline. It also refers to the explanations contained in paragraph 179 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, where it pointed out that the Convention does not cover sanctions relating to acts tending to endanger the ship or the life or health of persons (such as, for example, sanctions of imprisonment provided for in section 209 of the abovementioned Federal Law on Merchant Shipping punishing acts damaging a vessel and jeopardizing the lives of persons on board). However, as regards sanctions relating more generally to breaches of labour discipline, such as desertion, absence without leave or disobedience, such sanctions fall within the scope of the Convention.

While noting the Government’s indication in the report that the above provisions of the Federal Law on Merchant Shipping have not been applied in practice, the Committee nevertheless reiterates its hope that these provisions will be either repealed or amended, so as to limit their scope to circumstances in which the ship or the life or health of persons are endangered, in order to bring them into conformity with the Convention and the indicated practice.

Article 1(d). Punishment for having participated in strikes. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that section 231, paragraph 1, of the Penal Code provides for sanctions of imprisonment (which involves an obligation to perform labour) in cases where at least three public officials abandon their jobs or voluntarily abstain from performing any obligations related thereto, acting in agreement among them or pursuing an illegal objective. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the explanations in paragraphs 184–186 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, where it pointed out that penalties (involving compulsory labour) for participation in strikes in the civil service or other essential services may be applied only in circumstances where the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population are endangered, and if compensatory guarantees in the form of appropriate alternative procedures are provided.

The Committee reiterates its request for information on the application of the above provision in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

The Committee has noted the information provided by the Government in reply to its earlier comments.

Compulsory prison labour

1. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to certain provisions of the national legislation, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour) may be imposed in circumstances falling under Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. In its latest report, the Government indicates that all the provisions in question refer only to sanctions of imprisonment, without mentioning forced labour as a penalty. While having taken due note of these indications, as well as of the Government’s reference to the definition of forced labour contained in section 2(1) of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), the Committee wishes to draw the Government’s attention to the explanations provided in paragraphs 102-109 of its General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour, where it pointed out that the definition of forced or compulsory labour in Convention No. 29 makes no distinction between different forms of work and that Convention No. 105 prohibits the use "of any form" of forced or compulsory labour as a sanction, as a means of coercion, education, or discipline or as a punishment in respect of the persons within the ambit of Article 1(a), (c) and (d). The Committee has therefore considered that any sanctions involving compulsory labour, including prison sentences involving compulsory prison labour, are covered by Convention No. 105 in so far as they are imposed in the five cases specified by the Convention.

2. In the light of the above considerations, the Committee has noted that, under section 70 of the Penal Code, a convicted person serving a sentence of deprivation of liberty is under obligation to perform works as prescribed in the penitentiary institution. It also noted previously that, under section 24 of the Federal Act on the organization of prison establishments (No. 43 of 1992), prisoners of category "c" (those imprisoned for a specified term or for life) are to be employed in tasks specified by the prison’s by-laws and are entitled to receive remuneration (the tasks in which prisoners may be employed being specified in Chapter 3 of Ministerial Decree No. 471 of 1995).

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Political coercion and punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established system

3. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted the Penal Code provisions prohibiting the establishment of an organization or convening a meeting or conference for the purpose of fighting or mistreating the foundations or teachings of the Islamic religion or calling for the observance of another religion, these offences being punishable with imprisonment for a term of up to ten years (sections 317 and 320). The Committee also noted the provisions of sections 318 and 319 of the Penal Code, which make punishable with imprisonment any person who is a member of association specified in section 317 or who fights the foundations or teachings of the Islamic religion or proselytizes other religion, or calls for an idea or ideology which includes any of the above. As indicated above, sanctions of imprisonment involve an obligation to perform labour.

4. The Committee recalled that Article 1(a) prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It also referred to the explanations contained in paragraphs 133-140 of its General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour, in which it had observed that the Convention prohibits neither punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence, incite to violence or engage in preparatory acts aimed at violence, nor judicial imposition of certain restrictions on persons convicted of crimes of that kind; but sanctions involving compulsory labour fall within the scope of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the expression of views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system. The freedom of expression of political or ideological views may be equally restricted by way of prohibition of various kinds of meetings or associations, which is also contrary to the Convention, if such prohibition is enforced by sanctions involving compulsory labour.

5. The Committee therefore reiterates its hope that appropriate measures will be taken or envisaged in order to bring sections 317-320 of the Penal Code into conformity with the Convention, and that, pending the adoption of such measures, the Government will provide information on the application of sections 317-320 in practice, including copies of any court decisions and indicating the penalties imposed.

6. The Committee previously noted that, under Federal Law No. 15 of 1980 governing publications and publishing, penal sanctions of imprisonment (which involves compulsory labour, as indicated above) can be imposed, in accordance with sections 86 and 89 of the Law, for the violation of the following provisions of the Law:

-  section 70 (prohibition to criticize the President of the Republic or the rulers of the Emirates);

-  section 71 (prohibition to publish any material harmful to Islam, or to the Government, or to the country’s interests or the basic systems on which the society is founded);

-  section 76 (prohibition to publish material containing shameful information on the President of an Arab, Muslim country or a country with friendly ties, as well as material which may threaten the ties of the country with Arab, Muslim or friendly countries);

-  section 77 (prohibition to publish material which causes an injustice to Arabs or constitutes a misrepresentation of Arab civilization or heritage);

-  section 81 (prohibition to publish material which harms the national currency or causes a confusion over the economic situation in a country).

7. Referring to the explanations contained in paragraphs 133-141 of the abovementioned General Survey, the Committee observed that limitations may be imposed by law on individual rights and freedoms in order to ensure respect of the rights and freedoms of others and to meet the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society (such as e.g. laws on defamation, sedition and subversion, public order and security). But where the restrictions of these rights and freedoms are formulated in such wide and general terms that they may lead to the imposition of penalties involving compulsory labour as punishment for the expression of political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, it falls within the scope of the Convention.

8. The Committee therefore reiterates its hope that the above provisions of Federal Law No. 15 of 1980 will be reviewed in the light of these considerations, so that no sanctions involving forced or compulsory labour could be imposed for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. Noting also the Government’s indications in the report that the above provisions have never been applied in practice, and that no decisions and regulations have yet been issued for the implementation of this Law, the Committee requests the Government to supply copies of any such decisions and regulations, to which reference is made in section 107, as soon as they are adopted.

9. The Committee previously noted that, under section 41 of the Federal Law on non-profit organizations (No. 6 of 1974), any violation of the provisions of this Law is punishable with imprisonment (which involves compulsory prison labour). The Committee repeats its requests for information on the application of section 41 in practice, as well as for copies of court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.

10. Article 1(c). The Committee previously noted the provisions of the Federal Law on Merchant Shipping (No. 26 of 1981), under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour) may be imposed on seafarers for various breaches of labour discipline, such as violation of service related orders, neglecting to serve on vessels or in mounting guard, being absent from a vessel without an authorization, or any other act that may disrupt order or the service on board (section 200(a), (c), (g) and (j)), refusal to observe an order concerning work on board the vessel, repeated acts of disobedience (section 204 (d) and (e)), or performance of any acts mentioned in section 204 by more than three persons in agreement (section 205).

11. The Committee recalled that Article 1(c) prohibits the use of compulsory labour as a means of labour discipline. It also referred to the explanations contained in paragraphs 117-119 of its General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour, where it had pointed out that the Convention does not cover sanctions relating to acts tending to endanger the ship or the life or health of persons (such as sanctions of imprisonment provided for in section 209 of the abovementioned Federal Law on Merchant Shipping punishing acts damaging a vessel and jeopardizing the lives of persons on board); however, as regards sanctions relating more generally to breaches of labour discipline such as desertion, absence without leave or disobedience, such sanctions fall within the scope of the Convention. While noting the Government’s indication in the report that the above provisions of the Federal Law on Merchant Shipping have not been applied in practice, the Committee nevertheless reiterates its hope that these provisions will be either repealed or amended, so as to limit their scope to circumstances in which the ship or the life or health of persons are endangered, in order to bring them into conformity with the Convention and the indicated practice.

12. Article 1(d). In its earlier comments the Committee noted that section 231, paragraph 1, of the Penal Code provides for sanctions of imprisonment (which involves an obligation to perform labour) in cases where at least three public officials abandon their job or voluntarily abstain from performing any obligations related thereto, acting in agreement among them or pursuing an illegal objective. The Committee drew the Government’s attention to paragraph 123 of its General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour, where it had pointed out that it is not incompatible with the Convention to impose penalties (even involving an obligation to perform labour) for participation in strikes in the civil service or other essential services, provided that such provisions are applicable only to essential services in the strict sense of the term (that is, services who interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population) and that compensatory guarantees in the form of appropriate alternative procedures are provided.

13.  The Committee reiterates its request for information on the application of this provision in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee notes that no report has been received from the Government. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the following matters raised in its previous direct request:

Article 1(a) of the Convention. 1. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted the Penal Code provisions prohibiting the establishment of an organization or convening a meeting or conference for the purpose of fighting or mistreating the foundations or teachings of the Islamic religion or calling for the observance of another religion, these offences being punishable with imprisonment for a term from five to ten years (sections 317 and 320). It also noted that prisoners of category "c" (those imprisoned for a specified term or for life) are to be employed in tasks specified by the prison’s by-laws and are entitled to receive remuneration (section 24 of the Federal Retributory Establishments Organization Ordinance No. 43 of 1992 on the organization of prison establishments), and that the tasks in which prisoners may be employed are specified in Chapter 3 of Ministerial Decree No. 471 of 1995. The Committee has also noted the provisions of sections 318 and 319 of the Penal Code, which make punishable with imprisonment (involving an obligation to perform labour), any person who is a member of an association specified in section 317 or who fights the foundations or teachings of the Islamic religion or proselytizes another religion, or calls for an idea or ideology which includes any of the above.

The Committee recalls that Article 1(a) prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It also refers to the explanations contained in paragraphs 133 to 140 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, in which it observed that the Convention does not prohibit punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence, incite to violence or engage in preparatory acts aimed at violence. Nor does the Convention prohibit judicial imposition of certain restrictions on persons convicted of crimes of that kind. However, sanctions involving compulsory labour fall within the scope of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the expression of views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system, whether such prohibition is imposed by law or by a discretionary administrative decision which is not dependent on the commission of any criminal offence nor subject to the judicial review. The freedom of expression of political or ideological views may be equally restricted by way of prohibition of various kinds of meetings or associations, which is also contrary to the Convention, if such prohibition is enforced by sanctions involving compulsory labour.

The Committee therefore hopes that appropriate measures will be taken to bring sections 317 to 320 of the Penal Code into conformity with the Convention. While noting the Government’s indication in the report that there are no statistics on court decisions on the application of sections 317 and 320 of the Penal Code, the Committee hopes that, pending the adoption of such measures, the Government will provide information on the application of sections 317 to 320 in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their scope.

2. The Committee notes that, under Federal Law No. 15 of 1980 governing publications and publishing, penal sanctions of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) can be imposed, in accordance with sections 86 and 89 of the Law, for the violation of the following provisions of the Law:

-  section 70 (prohibition to criticize the President of the Republic or the rulers of the Emirates);

-  section 71 (prohibition to publish any material harmful to Islam, or to the Government, or to the country’s interests or the basic systems on which the society is founded);

-  section 76 (prohibition to publish material containing shameful information on the President of an Arab, Muslim country or a country with friendly ties, as well as material which may threaten the ties of the country with Arab, Muslim or friendly countries);

-  section 77 (prohibition to publish material which causes an injustice to Arabs or constitutes a misrepresentation of Arab civilization or heritage); and

-  section 81 (prohibition to publish material which harms the national currency or causes a confusion over the economic situation in a country).

Referring to the explanations contained in paragraphs 133 to 141 of the abovementioned General Survey, the Committee observes that limitations may be imposed by law on individual rights and freedoms in order to ensure respect of the rights and freedoms of others and to meet the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society (such as laws on defamation, sedition and subversion, public order and security). But where the restrictions of these rights and freedoms are formulated in such wide and general terms that they may lead to the imposition of penalties involving compulsory labour as punishment for the expression of political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, it falls within the scope of the Convention.

The Committee therefore hopes that the above provisions of Federal Law No. 15 of 1980 will be reviewed in the light of these considerations, so that no sanctions involving forced or compulsory labour could be imposed for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. Pending the revision, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of the above provisions in practice, particularly in regard to sentences that have been handed down, and to supply copies of the relevant court decisions. Please also supply copies of decisions and regulations to be issued for the implementation of this Law, to which reference is made in section 107.

3. The Committee notes that, under section 41 of the Federal Law on Non-Profit Organizations, No. 6 of 1974, any violation of the provisions of this Law is punishable with imprisonment (which involves an obligation to perform labour). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of section 41 in practice, supplying copies of court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.

4. Article 1(c). The Committee has noted the provisions of the Federal Law on Merchant Shipping, No. 26 of 1981, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed on seafarers for various breaches of labour discipline, such as violation of service-related orders, neglecting to serve on vessels or in mounting guard, being absent from a vessel without authorization, or any other act that may disrupt order or service on board (section 200(a), (c), (g) and (j)), refusal to observe an order concerning work on board the vessel, repeated acts of disobedience (section 204(d) and (e)), or performance of any acts mentioned in section 204 by more than three persons in agreement (section 205).

The Committee recalls that Article 1(c) prohibits the use of compulsory labour as a means of labour discipline. It also refers to the explanations contained in paragraphs 117 to 119 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, where it pointed out that the Convention does not cover sanctions relating to acts tending to endanger the ship or the life or health of persons (such as sanctions of imprisonment provided for in section 209 of the abovementioned Federal Law on Merchant Shipping punishing acts damaging a vessel and jeopardizing the lives of persons on board); however, as regards sanctions relating more generally to breaches of labour discipline such as desertion, absence without leave or disobedience, such sanctions fall within the scope of the Convention. The Committee therefore hopes that the above provisions of the Federal Law on Merchant Shipping will be either repealed or amended, so as to limit their scope to circumstances in which the ship or the life or health of persons are endangered.

5. Article 1(d). In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that section 231, paragraph 1, of the Penal Code provides for sanctions of imprisonment (which involves an obligation to work) in cases where at least three public officials abandon their job or voluntarily abstain from performing any obligations related thereto, acting in agreement among them or pursuing an illegal objective. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to paragraph 123 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, where it pointed out that it is not incompatible with the Convention to impose penalties (even involving an obligation to perform labour) for participation in strikes in the civil service or other essential services, provided that such provisions are applicable only to essential services in the strict sense of the term (that is, services whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population) and that compensatory guarantees in the form of appropriate alternative procedures are provided.

The Government indicates in its report that there are no statistics on any court decisions relating to the application of section 231. The Committee hopes that the Government will continue to provide information on the application of this provision in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.

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

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous direct request, including copies of various legislative texts.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. 1. In its earlier comments, the Committee noted the Penal Code provisions prohibiting the establishment of an organization or convening a meeting or conference for the purpose of fighting or mistreating the foundations or teachings of the Islamic religion or calling for the observance of another religion, these offences being punishable with imprisonment for a term from five to ten years (sections 317 and 320). It also noted that prisoners of category "c" (those imprisoned for a specified term or for life) are to be employed in tasks specified by the prison’s by-laws and are entitled to receive remuneration (section 24 of the Federal Retributory Establishments Organization Ordinance No. 43 of 1992 on the organization of prison establishments), and that the tasks in which prisoners may be employed are specified in Chapter 3 of Ministerial Decree No. 471 of 1995. The Committee has also noted the provisions of sections 318 and 319 of the Penal Code, which make punishable with imprisonment (involving an obligation to perform labour), any person who is a member of an association specified in section 317 or who fights the foundations or teachings of the Islamic religion or proselytizes another religion, or calls for an idea or ideology which includes any of the above.

The Committee recalls that Article 1(a) prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It also refers to the explanations contained in paragraphs 133 to 140 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, in which it observed that the Convention does not prohibit punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence, incite to violence or engage in preparatory acts aimed at violence. Nor does the Convention prohibit judicial imposition of certain restrictions on persons convicted of crimes of that kind. However, sanctions involving compulsory labour fall within the scope of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the expression of views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system, whether such prohibition is imposed by law or by a discretionary administrative decision which is not dependent on the commission of any criminal offence nor subject to the judicial review. The freedom of expression of political or ideological views may be equally restricted by way of prohibition of various kinds of meetings or associations, which is also contrary to the Convention, if such prohibition is enforced by sanctions involving compulsory labour.

The Committee therefore hopes that appropriate measures will be taken to bring sections 317 to 320 of the Penal Code into conformity with the Convention. While noting the Government’s indication in the report that there are no statistics on court decisions on the application of sections 317 and 320 of the Penal Code, the Committee hopes that, pending the adoption of such measures, the Government will provide information on the application of sections 317 to 320 in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their scope.

2. The Committee notes that, under Federal Law No. 15 of 1980 governing publications and publishing, penal sanctions of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) can be imposed, in accordance with sections 86 and 89 of the Law, for the violation of the following provisions of the Law:

-  section 70 (prohibition to criticize the President of the Republic or the rulers of the Emirates);

-  section 71 (prohibition to publish any material harmful to Islam, or to the Government, or to the country’s interests or the basic systems on which the society is founded);

-  section 76 (prohibition to publish material containing shameful information on the President of an Arab, Muslim country or a country with friendly ties, as well as material which may threaten the ties of the country with Arab, Muslim or friendly countries);

-  section 77 (prohibition to publish material which causes an injustice to Arabs or constitutes a misrepresentation of Arab civilization or heritage); and

-  section 81 (prohibition to publish material which harms the national currency or causes a confusion over the economic situation in a country).

Referring to the explanations contained in paragraphs 133 to 141 of the abovementioned General Survey, the Committee observes that limitations may be imposed by law on individual rights and freedoms in order to ensure respect of the rights and freedoms of others and to meet the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society (such as laws on defamation, sedition and subversion, public order and security). But where the restrictions of these rights and freedoms are formulated in such wide and general terms that they may lead to the imposition of penalties involving compulsory labour as punishment for the expression of political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, it falls within the scope of the Convention.

The Committee therefore hopes that the above provisions of Federal Law No. 15 of 1980 will be reviewed in the light of these considerations, so that no sanctions involving forced or compulsory labour could be imposed for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. Pending the revision, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of the above provisions in practice, particularly in regard to sentences that have been handed down, and to supply copies of the relevant court decisions. Please also supply copies of decisions and regulations to be issued for the implementation of this Law, to which reference is made in section 107.

3. The Committee notes that, under section 41 of the Federal Law on Non-Profit Organizations, No. 6 of 1974, any violation of the provisions of this Law is punishable with imprisonment (which involves an obligation to perform labour). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of section 41 in practice, supplying copies of court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.

4. Article 1(c). The Committee has noted the provisions of the Federal Law on Merchant Shipping, No. 26 of 1981, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed on seafarers for various breaches of labour discipline, such as violation of service-related orders, neglecting to serve on vessels or in mounting guard, being absent from a vessel without authorization, or any other act that may disrupt order or service on board (section 200(a), (c), (g) and (j)), refusal to observe an order concerning work on board the vessel, repeated acts of disobedience (section 204(d) and (e)), or performance of any acts mentioned in section 204 by more than three persons in agreement (section 205).

The Committee recalls that Article 1(c) prohibits the use of compulsory labour as a means of labour discipline. It also refers to the explanations contained in paragraphs 117 to 119 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, where it pointed out that the Convention does not cover sanctions relating to acts tending to endanger the ship or the life or health of persons (such as sanctions of imprisonment provided for in section 209 of the abovementioned Federal Law on Merchant Shipping punishing acts damaging a vessel and jeopardizing the lives of persons on board); however, as regards sanctions relating more generally to breaches of labour discipline such as desertion, absence without leave or disobedience, such sanctions fall within the scope of the Convention. The Committee therefore hopes that the above provisions of the Federal Law on Merchant Shipping will be either repealed or amended, so as to limit their scope to circumstances in which the ship or the life or health of persons are endangered.

5. Article 1(d). In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that section 231, paragraph 1, of the Penal Code provides for sanctions of imprisonment (which involves an obligation to work) in cases where at least three public officials abandon their job or voluntarily abstain from performing any obligations related thereto, acting in agreement among them or pursuing an illegal objective. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to paragraph 123 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, where it pointed out that it is not incompatible with the Convention to impose penalties (even involving an obligation to perform labour) for participation in strikes in the civil service or other essential services, provided that such provisions are applicable only to essential services in the strict sense of the term (that is, services whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population) and that compensatory guarantees in the form of appropriate alternative procedures are provided.

The Government indicates in its report that there are no statistics on any court decisions relating to the application of section 231. The Committee hopes that the Government will continue to provide information on the application of this provision in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.

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

The Committee notes with interest the information provided by the Government in its first report on the application of the Convention. It would be grateful if the Government would supply, in its next report, additional information on the following points.

1.  Article 1(a) of the Convention.  The Committee notes the Penal Code provisions prohibiting the establishment of an organization or convening a meeting or conference for the purpose of fighting or mistreating the foundations or teachings of the Islamic religion or calling for the observance of another religion, these offences being punishable with imprisonment for a term from five up to ten years (sections 317 and 320). It also notes that prisoners of category "c" (those imprisoned for a specified term or for life) are to be employed in tasks specified by the prison’s by-laws and are entitled to receive remuneration (section 24 of the Penal Code). The Committee requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the application in practice of sections 317 and 320, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their scope, in order to be able to assess their conformity with the Convention, as well as copies of prisons’ by-laws provisions relating to prison labour referred to in section 24 of the Penal Code.

2.  Please also supply a copy of Federal Law No. 15 of 1988 governing publications, as well as copies of legislation concerning political parties, associations, assemblies and meetings.

3.  Article 1(c).  The Committee asks the Government to supply, in its next report, information concerning any legislative provisions applicable to seafarers in cases of breaches of labour discipline such as desertion, absence without leave or disobedience.

4.  Article 1(d).  The Committee notes that section 231, paragraph 1, of the Penal Code provides for sanctions of imprisonment (for a term of up to one year, which involves an obligation to work for prisoners of category "c" referred to above) in case where at least three public officials abandon their job or voluntarily abstain from performing any obligations related thereto, acting in agreement among them or pursuing an illegal objective. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to paragraph 123 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, where it pointed out that it is not incompatible with the Convention to impose penalties (even involving an obligation to perform labour) for participation in strikes in the civil service or other essential services, provided that such provisions are applicable only to essential services in the strict sense of the term (that is, services whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population) and that compensatory guarantees in the form of appropriate alternative procedures are provided. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the application in practice of the abovementioned penal provision, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope, in order to be able to assess its conformity with the Convention.

5.  The Committee notes that section 112 of Federal Law No. 8 on the regulation of labour relations provides for a temporary suspension of a worker from work in case of participation in an unlawful strike. Please indicate whether any other sanctions are applicable to punish participation in unlawful strikes, besides those provided for in this section and those applicable to public officials referred to in point 4 above.