Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2003, Publication: 91st ILC session (2003)

Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138) - Kenya (Ratification: 1979)

A Government representative stated that his Government had taken careful note of the various comments made by the Committee of Experts and had the following points to raise concerning these comments. The Children Act, 2001, which established safeguards for the rights and welfare of the child, had received Presidential assent in December 2001, six months after the 89th Session of the Conference (June 2001). The primary purpose of this Act was threefold. First, to make provision for parental responsibility, fostering, adoption, custody, maintenance, guardianship, care and protection of children. Second, to make provision for the administration of children's institutions. Third, to give effect to the principles of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child. A copy of the Children Act, which had come into effect on 1 March 2002, had been supplied to the Office.

The implementation of truly free and compulsory primary education for all children of school age, with effect from January 2003, was one of the most important developments in the area of protection of children. The new policy on free primary education had been adopted in fulfilment of an electoral commitment made by the new Government elected in December 2002. Under this electoral commitment, the Government had undertaken to completely eliminate all forms of payments, including any hidden levies, that could hinder the enjoyment of free primary education by all children. Consequently, of the 9.2 million school-age children, 7.5 million were currently enrolled, up from 5.9 million before the programme. In short, between January and May 2003, a total of 1.6 million children who would otherwise have been engaged in child labour had now been enrolled in school. The Government was currently engaged in the massive construction of classrooms and the provision of other teaching facilities in order to accommodate the unprecedented large influx of children. In this respect, he acknowledged with appreciation the generous donor assistance received from UNICEF, the European Union, the United Kingdom and the United States.

Another area of progress recorded since January 2003 was the rehabilitation of street children in all urban centres in Kenya. These children, especially between the ages of 16 and 18 years, had been placed into rehabilitation and vocational training centres. The programme was ongoing and already a total of 1,813 former street children had been admitted into the National Youth Service, with others to follow in due course. The Government would continue to update the Office on the implementation of this programme.

With regard to the minimum age for admission to employment, he said that the revision of the country's labour laws, including both the Employment Act (Chapter 226) and the Employment Act (Children) Rules of 1977, was being undertaken by a task force with the assistance of ILO experts in order to bring the legislation into conformity with the various Conventions ratified by Kenya. The task force would complete its work by August 2003. In this framework, the minimum age for employment would remain at 16 years, instead of 15 years as had been initially proposed. In this respect, the Government intended to develop comprehensive legislation which would address the protection of children against all forms of economic exploitation and any work that was likely to be hazardous or to interfere with their development in all economic sectors, in accordance with Convention No. 182, which had also been ratified by Kenya. The task force was working on harmonizing the proposed legislation with the relevant provisions of Convention No. 182.

With regard to the preparation by the Ministry of Education of draft legislation to make primary education compulsory, the Government had, in addition to the new policy mentioned earlier, identified and was in the process of addressing the following major factors affecting access and retention of children in school: the continued prevalence of poverty in many parts of Kenya, as manifested in the lack of food and finances in many schools; gender bias that had continued to lead to preference for boys' access to education as opposed to girls; teenage pregnancies which had continued to contribute to increased school drop-out by girls; prohibitive distances to schools, particularly among nomadic communities; the occupation of children, for example in coffee picking, tourist activities and livestock herding; unfavourable geographic and climatic conditions in certain regions; excessively heavy curricula coupled with inadequate implementation; cultural practices, such as early marriages; and inadequate emphasis on the identification and education of disabled children. For the sake of further clarity, he emphasized that the age of completion of free and compulsory schooling remained 16 years.

The Government acknowledged that many children continued to work in family agricultural activities and business enterprises during school holidays and after school without pay. However, he said that this was regarded as part of their upbringing and integration into society and did not interfere with their education or moral upbringing. Nevertheless, the Government acknowledged that, due to the poverty prevailing in some parts of Kenya, especially in the arid and semi-arid areas, unfortunate situations did occur where children of school age were compelled by their parents or their own economic situation, for example due to HIV/AIDS, to work for their survival. In this connection, he indicated that, in the framework of the ongoing review of the labour legislation, the Government intended to amend section 10(5) of the Children Act, 2001, so as to bring it into line with the provisions of the Convention.

He added that the Government had taken careful note of the comments made by the Committee of Experts regarding the possibility of the employment of children with the prior written permission of an authorized officer and was taking the necessary measures in this respect. It had also taken careful note of the concerns expressed with regard to the performance of light work by children and would take the relevant necessary measures in the framework of the ongoing revision of the labour legislation. With respect to the comments made by the Committee of Experts regarding the definition of hazardous work to be prohibited for young persons under 18 years of age, the Government was committed to taking the necessary measures, given that it had also ratified Convention No. 182, in consultation with the social partners and in the framework of the ongoing review of the country's labour legislation. Concerning the comments made by the Committee of Experts on the information contained in the 1998/99 Child Labour Survey and the draft document entitled "Child labour policy", it should be noted that a new major development had occurred in this area following the introduction of truly free primary education, as a result of which 1.6 million additional children had been enrolled in primary schools throughout the country. To conclude, he reaffirmed the Government's commitment to achieving the application of Convention No. 138 in practice and stated that he looked forward to a constructive dialogue in the Conference Committee.

The Employer members thanked the Government representative for the information provided and took note of the heavy emphasis that he had placed on Convention No. 182, which was nevertheless not the subject of the discussion. However, one aspect of the case that did overlap with the provisions of Convention No. 182 was hazardous work. In this context, it would have been helpful if the Government could have explained in writing to the ILO how the Children Act, 2001, related to Convention No. 182. They emphasized that Convention No. 138 was perhaps the most technical and detailed of the fundamental Conventions. The Committee of Experts had identified six areas in which the national legislation fell short of the provisions of the Convention. The Government had indicated to the Conference Committee that it was aware of these areas, but had not provided any information on any action that was being taken to address these issues or on when draft legislation would be forthcoming in order to bring the law into line with the Convention. This issue had already been discussed the previous year. The task of bringing the legislation into line with the Convention was not easy, and ILO assistance might be useful in this respect, especially since the way in which the Government had addressed the comments made by the Committee of Experts, as a six point list, seemed to indicate that it did not know exactly what action to take to resolve the problems. With respect to compulsory education, the Employer members requested clarification on the gap which seemed to exist between the age at which compulsory education ended (which had been understood by the Employers to be 13 years) and the minimum age for admission to employment (16 years).

With regard to the six points raised by the Committee of Experts, they noted, first, that the extension of the minimum age for admission to employment beyond industrial enterprises was an important point, as the legal gap in this area left a large potential workforce of children without legislative protection. In this respect, they noted that although compulsory primary education was not mentioned explicitly in the Convention, it was inextricably entwined with the provisions on minimum age and needed to be addressed in order to comply fully with the Convention. Secondly, with regard to the definition in the national legislation of child labour as consisting of labour in exchange for payment, the law did not provide effective protection given that 80 per cent of children were engaged in unpaid work. There was a need to adopt measures in order to secure for these children the protection afforded by the Convention. Thirdly, with regard to permits allowing the employment of children, this issue raised three complex questions: child labour under the age of 13 years, light work and hazardous work. The Employer members suggested that the Government seek ILO assistance to address these overlapping issues. The question of light work in particular was a complicated issue which needed to be examined further in the light of the inconsistencies noted by the Committee of Experts between the various legislative provisions. With regard to hazardous employment, although the Children Act, 2001, provided for the protection of every child from hazardous work, the Government had still not adopted the implementing regulations to define the types of hazardous employment covered by this provision. Thus, although there was an appearance of protection in law, the necessary regulatory regime had not been established in order to allow such protection to be implemented. The Employer members welcomed the expression of goodwill by the Government, but noted that there was a need to move forward in order to produce concrete results. They suggested that ILO technical assistance might be necessary in order to adopt the necessary legislation and take measures for its implementation.

The Worker members thanked the Government representative for the information provided, which showed that the new Government intended to make real progress. They also welcomed the assurances given about the Government's commitment to provide basic education, which was essential for the effective elimination of child labour. They also welcomed the wide distribution of the recommendations of the Meeting of Experts from the African Region on Labour Inspection and Child Labour held in Harare in September 2001 as they were particularly relevant to the discussion. They recalled that in the early 1990s the Government, in tripartite collaboration with the social partners and with the support of the ILO, had developed one of the most successful labour inspection services in Africa. From 1990 to 1995, the number of inspections carried out had arisen from 3,700 per annum (performed by 220 inspectors) to 26,800 (by 180 inspectors). However, much of this great progress had been lost in recent years during the corrupt regime of the previous administration. Moreover, IMF and World Bank structural adjustment policies had imposed cuts in public expenditure and the number of labour and factory inspectors had fallen by more than one-third, despite an increase in the working population and the number of enterprises. Although the remaining inspectors had continued to perform well until the end of the 1990s, the dramatic explosion of corruption under the last regime had destroyed these gains, leading to an increase in the worst forms of child labour and the advent of some forms of child labour, such as stone crushing.

The new Government deserved an advance of trust and it should be expected to fulfil its obligations and demonstrate transparency in the struggle against child labour. This required clear minimum age legislation, education laws that were consistent with it and a labour inspectorate restored to its former state. Above all, it required a re-invigoration of the tripartite alliance and social dialogue that would provide the vehicle for implementing the law. Implementation was the key and the ILO should support the new Government and the social partners in that endeavour. The Bretton Woods institutions should cease to undermine Kenya's public services, in accordance with the Worst Forms of Child Labour Recommendation, 1999 (No. 190) which called upon international institutions to support the aims of Convention No. 182, particularly since Kenya had ratified both Conventions Nos. 182 and 138, which were inextricably linked.

There was no doubt that the Government had the ability, the opportunity and political will to tackle this significant problem. That made it all the more puzzling that the Government had still not adopted the legislative amendments requested by the Committee of Experts for so many years. The Government had made progress with the adoption of the Children Act in 2001 and the Worker members had welcomed, in the previous discussion of this case, its decision not to pursue the legislative amendment to section 2 of the Employment Act, 1976, in order to reduce the minimum age, with the result that the minimum age for admission to employment or work was maintained at 16 years. However, the fundamental problem persisted. The Government had assured this Committee in 2001 that it would extend the legislation to other sectors of the economy by December 2002 in order to address the fact that section 25(1) of the Employment Act limited to industrial enterprises the minimum age for admission to employment. Section 3(1) of the Employment (Children) Rules, 1977, which allowed the employment of children with no apparent minimum age restrictions pursuant to a written permission by an authorized officer, were incompatible with Articles 2 and 7 of the Convention. No permit should be issued if it allowed employment or work: firstly, by any person under the age of 13 years irrespective of the type of work; secondly, for persons between 13 and 15 years of age, unless this was for light work (the Government not having availed itself of the developing country derogations of 12 and 14 as contained in Article 2(4) and Article 7(4)); and thirdly, for persons between 16 and 18 years of age in any hazardous works. The Worker members therefore welcomed the assurances of the Government that this matter would be dealt with. They added, in this connection, that it was also necessary to dispel some of the unhelpful blurring of the Convention's minimum age requirements which were the currency of certain campaigners who seemed determined to explain why child labour could not be eliminated and who, at their most extreme, talked about "children's right to work", and who also raised the issue of the lack of high-quality education as a reason for not removing children from work and into schools. The Worker members emphasized that over 3 million children aged 6 to 14 were working in Kenya. At least 1.3 million did not attend school. Increasing school enrolment itself would strengthen the campaign for quality education, but suggesting that children were better off at work than learning at least literacy and numeracy could hardly be construed as a path to empowerment. The ILO had been given the responsibility to set and supervise international labour standards on child labour, the terms of which were firmly supported by the Worker members. However, IPEC officers in the field were often forced to deal with such mischievous misinterpretations of the Conventions, which could confuse ILO constituents and undermine the basis for tripartite collaboration in the struggle against child labour.

The new Government had demonstrated its political will by adopting legislation to make primary education compulsory. The Worker members welcomed this absolutely essential measure to combat child labour. However, the Children Act, 2001, did not specify the age at which compulsory school ceased. The Government's Child Labour Report, published in 2001, indicated that compulsory education lasted from 6 to 13 years of age. Although this fitted with the definition of basic education agreed upon in the debate on Convention No. 182, there still remained a discrepancy between the age of completion of compulsory schooling (13 or 14) and the minimum age for admission to employment or work (16 years). They hoped that the Government would clarify this matter in the new legislation. Section 10(5) of the Children Act, 2001, which defined child labour as any situation in which a child provided labour in exchange for payment was also inadequate in light of types of child labour such as forced labour and in view of the findings of the Child Labour Report, according to which nearly 79 per cent of children who worked did so in family agricultural undertakings and were not paid. This meant that the majority of children working in Kenya were excluded both from the Children Act, 2001, which covered all sectors but not all types of employment relationship, and the Employment Act, 1976, which covered only industrial undertakings. Furthermore, the Children Act, 2001, did not deal with hazardous work. In a country where the majority of children worked in agriculture - including commercial agriculture both in large undertakings and in smallholdings - fishing, construction, domestic service and the urban informal sector, the restriction of the coverage of the legislation to paid work in industry excluded most of Kenya's child labourers from the protection of the law. Given that Kenya had not availed itself of any of the exemptions envisaged in the Convention, given that the Convention's fundamental purpose was the effective abolition of child labour and given that the Convention was a fundamental human rights standard promoted for universal ratification, the principles of which were also binding by virtue of the 1998 Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, such minimal application greatly diverged from the obligations incumbent on the Government. The Worker members therefore hoped that the drafting of comprehensive legislation on child labour would proceed rapidly and would cover all sectors. They also agreed with the statement made by the Employer members that ILO assistance in this process should be sought and provided.

Finally, with regard to the definition of hazardous work, the Government had admitted the need for such a determination as long ago as 1990 and should now proceed expeditiously with that definition on the basis of tripartite consultation. As to the argument that non-commercial family agriculture was exempt from the Convention, they recalled that agriculture was one of the world's most hazardous occupations, whether on plantations or in family farms, and in Kenya many family farms were locked into the commercial agricultural market. There were, for example, some 400,000 small tea growers in the country. According to a recent report by Ms Sonia Rosen, children working in coffee, tea and sisal plantations often woke up before sunrise in order to walk, sometimes long distances, from their homes to the plantations. They had no breaks, were not allowed to talk and rarely had time to eat. The work was physically demanding, requiring bending, kneeling, climbing ladders and carrying bags or buckets. Children also weeded and cultivated the soil, fixed irrigation canals and applied dangerous pesticides, often using dangerous tools and sometimes operating unsafe farm machinery that they did not know how to operate. Many activities, such as carrying heavy and oversized loads, resulted in permanent disabilities and injuries. Fatigue was an ever-present problem because children could work for between 8 and 12 hours. Because they were outside all day, children were particularly susceptible to heat exhaustion, disease-carrying insects and illnesses posed by unsanitary drinking water. The myth that child labour in agriculture was not hazardous should finally be dispelled.

The Worker member of Kenya associated himself with the statement made by the Worker members and informed the Committee of the work accomplished by the Kenyan Central Organization of Trade Unions (COTU) with a view to the elimination of child labour. The Child Labour Department of COTU had carried out a number of awareness-raising workshops for trade union as well as religious and community leaders with the assistance of the ILO-IPEC programme, the American Center for International Labour Solidarity and the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions. The programmes focused on two COTU affiliates, namely the Kenya Plantation and Agricultural Workers' Union and the Kenya Union of Sugar Plantation Workers. As a result of these efforts, there was a hope that clauses on child labour might be incorporated in collective agreements within the coming year. There was also hope that the issue of age disparity in the definition of child labour would be addressed by the Labour Laws Review Task Force, while the Children Act, 2001, could provide a clear legal basis for defining the term "child"; this issue needed to be explored further in order to adopt a definition of child labour which would be in accordance with the Convention. The new Government seemed to be committed to eradicate child labour, as evidenced by the fulfilment of its promise to introduce free primary education. He expressed the hope that the new Government would also recognize the necessity of training and retraining labour inspectors so that they would be able to cope with the new challenges at the workplace, especially with respect to child labour. Child labour was rare where trade unions existed and where a collective agreement was in place. However, it was present in the many small farms where labour had not yet been organized. The eradication of child labour required concerted efforts by all the social partners, and needed to be extended to the fisheries and mining sectors of the economy. He urged the ILO to continue to provide assistance so that poverty, which was the main cause of child labour, could eventually be overcome.

The Worker member of Finland speaking on behalf of the Worker members of the Nordic countries, raised the question of the education of children, and especially girls, who should receive education on an equal basis with boys. Parents often undervalued the education of girls in Kenya, partly because adult women faced discrimination in employment and were thus viewed as having a lower earnings potential. As a result, only 35 per cent of girls finished school. It was extremely important for the Government to do its utmost in its fight against child labour and to secure education for girls. Children were the most valuable resource and represented the future. Their place was not at work, but at school. The report mentioned earlier by the Worker members indicated that poverty was a serious problem in Kenya, due to which children often worked as casual workers during harvest time. Even though the Government had shown a positive will by introducing free compulsory education, many hindrances still remained for families with low incomes to educate their children. For instance, such families could not afford to buy school uniforms and the Government should abolish all such hindrances. Finally, she emphasized the importance of providing free meals at school and urged the Government to tackle this matter, as starving children could not benefit from their education.

The Government member of the United States stated that the issue of child labour was one of utmost concern to her Government. She noted the statement made by the Government representative and welcomed the fact that primary education was now both free and compulsory for children up to the age of 16 years, if that was indeed what the Government was indicating to the Committee, as well as the other efforts made by the Government to bring the law and practice into conformity with the Convention. She further noted that Kenya was a recipient country of United States government funding through the ILO's IPEC technical assistance programme and encouraged the Government to work with the ILO to bring its child labour legislation into conformity with Convention No. 138.

A Worker member of Chad stated that the information supplied by the Government representative to the Committee had been encouraging. According to earlier statistics, over 3 million children between the ages of 6 and 14 years were obliged to work. Of this number, more than half could not have access to primary education and a large majority could not have access to secondary education. The Government representative had indicated that since January 2003 some 7 million children had access to education, which represented important progress.

The problem of child labour in Kenya was nevertheless serious. The corruption of the previous Government and structural adjustment had been partially responsible for this situation. The African trade union movement was confident that the new Government would re-establish tripartism in Kenya, in conformity with the respective ILO Conventions. Indeed, the application of the eight fundamental ILO Conventions and dialogue among the social partners would eliminate child labour in itself. He hoped that the Government would take measures in this regard.

Another Worker member of Chad stated that child labour affected the development of the country and the dignity of children. In Kenya, the problem of child labour was serious. According to the statistics, 1.9 million children from 5 to 17 years were working. Many of them worked not for remuneration, but for a small ration of food. They worked without rest periods, from the beginning of the day until night fell, without the possibility of time off. They worked because their parents were poor. He indicated that the concept of the establishment of a minimum age for admission to employment or work was important, and that the Free Confederation of Workers of Chad (CLTT) welcomed the statement by the Government that it no longer planned to reduce this minimum age from 16 to 15 years. In any case, several problems remained. The age of the completion of compulsory schooling had to be aligned with the minimum age of admission to employment or work. Education had to be accessible and free of charge for all, and, with a view to avoiding the problem of unemployment, should also offer children adequate vocational training. Furthermore, the problem of the schooling of young girls was of primary importance. In fact, in African countries, and particularly in Kenya, a large number of young girls worked constantly in dangerous occupations without any social coverage. They frequently left their homes alone and at a very young age, and they worked as servants in the service of unscrupulous employers. He hope that the Government would pay particular attention to the conclusions and recommendations of the Committee of Experts with respect to the legislation and that it would take the necessary measures in practice. The destiny of over 2 million children depended on the will of the Government to apply the principles of Convention No. 138.

The Government representative thanked the Employer and Worker members as well as the speakers who had taken the floor, for the debate which was a characteristic example of a constructive dialogue which should take place in the Conference Committee in order to help governments implement their obligations. With regard to the comments made by the Employer members on the need to bring the labour legislation into conformity with the Convention, he stated that a tripartite task force had been established in order to review all labour laws, as quite a few of them remained unchanged since 1963 when Kenya had become independent. Every effort was being made to review the labour laws in line with ratified Conventions, especially Convention No. 138. On the basis of an agreement reached between the Government and the ILO, which was represented in the tripartite task force by a senior expert, draft legislation would be examined by the ILO prior to its introduction to Parliament for adoption and would be transmitted to the ILO for printing.

With regard to the existence of a gap between the age at which children completed their compulsory education and the minimum age for admission to employment, he explained that most children tended to start school at the age of 6 years. However, in many cases and according to the circumstances, children started school at the later age of 7 or 8. The compulsory education system lasted for ten years if schooling had started in 1998, and for eight years if it had started before then. Consequently, children who had started school before 1998 at the age of 7 or 8 would complete school at the age of 15 or 16. In all other cases, the minimum age at which children would complete their compulsory education was 16 years of age. While most children went to school at an early age, certain difficulties existed due to the fact that a large part of Kenya was desert or semi-desert and it was difficult to gain access to school in these areas.

With regard to the definition of child labour, a clear definition was not yet available. It was customary for children to do light agricultural work in family enterprises after school or during holidays under parental supervision. In his view, this practice was part of the normal upbringing of children and was common even in Europe. Regarding the issue of hazardous work, a clear definition had not yet been adopted and this matter was currently under discussion. According to the available legislative drafts, the definition of hazardous work would probably include heavy, underground or night work, or work involving dangerous substances. With regard to light work, a definition would be adopted in the future on the basis of a tripartite agreement and would be reflected in legislation. In this respect, it should be clarified that children below 13 years of age were not permitted to work, including the performance of light work. With regard to work permits allowing the employment of children below the normal minimum age, he wished to specify that for any labour commissioner to issue such permits a series of special conditions had to be fulfilled; for instance, the work carried out had to be light work under supervision and should not affect the moral integrity of the child. As to the point raised with regard to girl children, he endorsed the view that there was a need to pay equal attention to girls as to boys. Certain issues, such as forced marriages and unwanted pregnancies, constituted a problem to which the Government was paying attention with a view to finding a solution.

The Employer members thanked the Government representative for the information provided which had confirmed the comments they had made earlier about the existence of a gap between the age at which compulsory schooling ended and the minimum age for admission to employment. It seemed that the age at which children happened to conclude their compulsory education depended on the age at which they had started school and that this age varied. It was necessary to indicate in this respect that there was a need for a more regular educational system. The Employer members did not doubt the good intentions of the Government, but could not consider that a simple statement that the Government would make every effort to address this issue constituted a satisfactory result, especially in light of the fact that this case had been discussed the previous year and there had been no new developments since with regard to the application of Convention No. 138. Concerning the Government's statement that draft legislation was under preparation and would be given to the ILO for printing, they suggested that the ILO should provide assistance at an earlier stage to facilitate the development of such legislation.

The Worker members stated that this case had been examined with the attention it deserved and thanked the Government for their observations and assurances, as well as the Employer members for their comments. After having heard the Government's summary, the Worker members were puzzled by the fact that millions of children continued to work in Kenya. The fundamental problem was that the legislation remained contradictory and incoherent and was not in conformity with the Convention. The Worker members expected the new Government to rebuild and strengthen an effective tripartite alliance in the country in order to eradicate child labour and promote universal basic education. They also expected the Government to avail itself, as a matter of urgency, of ILO technical assistance from all relevant departments in order to develop coherent legislation in conformity with the Convention. ILO assistance, a coherent legislative framework, an effective labour inspectorate, strong tripartite consultations and inter-agency cooperation among the authorities, including support and not hindrance from the Bretton Woods institutions, were key tools for practical success.

The Worker members concluded by referring to the case of Benta, a 10-year-old girl who worked in a coffee plantation. Exposure to pesticides put children like her at greater risk of developing skin irritations, breathing difficulties and long-term health problems, including cancer. Young pickers also suffered from snake bites, back strain and other injuries. Benta did go to school, but on Saturdays she reported by 7 a.m. to the coffee fields, where she earned less than $1 for ten hours of work. Her hands were very painful and the chemicals burnt her face as if hot water had been poured on it. The Worker members looked forward to the Government's next report and wished them and Kenya's social partners every success in their efforts. Benta and millions like her, as well as the members of the Committee, were looking forward to concrete results.

The Committee noted the information provided by the Government representative and the discussion that followed. It noted the information in the Government's last report that the draft legislation to reduce the minimum age from 16 to 15 had been withdrawn. The Committee requested the Government to provide information in its next report containing statistics on the number of boys and girls who were working, their ages, the sectors concerned and the geographical areas. The Committee noted the statement by the Government representative that the various matters raised by the Committee of Experts would be taken into consideration. The Committee noted in particular the indication by the Government representative that a free and compulsory primary education system for children of school age had been established as from January 2003, as well as the results obtained by this measure between January and May, which showed that over 1 million more children were attending school than before.

The Committee, recalling the fundamental importance of Convention No. 138 for the abolition of child labour, and particularly the importance of establishing the minimum age for admission to employment or work in all sectors, including agriculture, expressed the hope that the Government would maintain its efforts with the social partners and the assistance of the Office to give effect to the Convention in both law and practice. The Committee urged the Government to request ILO technical assistance with a view to clearly establishing the situation with regard to the age of completion of compulsory schooling and the minimum age for admission to employment. The Committee emphasized the benefits of labour inspection for preventive purposes in determining hazardous work, in accordance with the Convention, with particular reference to the agricultural sector.