Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Libya (Ratification: 1961)

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2026, Publication: 114th ILC session (2026)

Written information provided by the Government

The Government has provided the following written information, as well as copies of the Executive Regulations of Correction and Rehabilitation Institutions (2005); extracts of the Draft Constitution of 2017; the Constitutional Declaration of 2011; extracts of the Labour Relations Act No. 12 of 2010; a Government Memorandum on Reconstituting the National Committee for Responses to ILO Observations (2025); and the Council of Ministers Decision Establishing the National Committee on ILO Forced Labour Conventions (2025), in Arabic.

Introduction

The Government reaffirms its full commitment to the Convention and is keen to align its national legislation with the provisions therein. Its obligations under the Convention are focused on ensuring that forced labour is not imposed as a means of punishment or discipline. The Government is working to guarantee clarity in legal texts and their conformity with the Convention, so as to prevent any interpretation that could lead to the imposition of forced labour on persons peacefully expressing political or intellectual views.

Review of existing legislation

The Government notes that the provisions contained in the Penal Code (articles 20, 21, 23, 24, 175, 178, 195, 205, 206, 207, 220, 221, 245, 290), the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 (articles 28, 29, 37, 38, 43), and the Anti-Cybercrime Law of 2022 (articles 37, 9, 39, 4, 7) are all subject to thorough legal review. This process aims to remove ambiguities and ensure clarity so that no interpretation may result in the imposition of forced labour on persons peacefully expressing political or intellectual opinions.

Constitutional framework

The Constitutional Declaration of 2011 serves as the supreme reference during the transitional phase and has effectively repealed earlier provisions that restricted press freedom or could be interpreted as imposing forced labour, such as certain provisions of the Great Green Charter and the Publications Act of 1972.

• Article 14 guarantees freedom of opinion, expression, press and publication.
• Article 6 affirms equality before the law without discrimination based on political opinion.
• Article 31 stipulates that no crime or penalty shall exist without legal provision and guarantees fair trial rights.
• Article 32 affirms judicial independence and prohibits exceptional courts.

In addition, the Draft Constitution adopted by the Constitution Drafting Assembly explicitly provides in article 34 that the State shall protect human dignity, prohibit torture, cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, enforced disappearance, slavery, servitude and trafficking in persons, and stipulates that such crimes shall not lapse by prescription. It further prohibits forced labour except in cases of necessity or pursuant to a judicial sentence.

Labour Relations Act No. 12 of 2010

• Article 2 prohibits compulsion, servitude and all forms of oppression and exploitation, affirming that work is both a right and a duty based on equality among citizens.
• Article 5 defines forced labour as any work or service exacted from a person under threat and without voluntary consent, while recognizing exceptions consistent with international standards (such as compulsory military service, judicial sentences or emergency situations).
• Article 3 affirms that employment shall be based on competence, merit and integrity, and prohibits favouritism or discrimination based on trade union affiliation or social origin.

Executive Regulations of Correction and Rehabilitation Institutions (2005)

The Government emphasizes that work within correctional institutions is not a compulsory punishment but is organized under humane and legal standards, aiming at rehabilitation and social reintegration:

• Article 8 requires a medical examination to determine the inmate’s capacity for work.
• Article 30 prohibits the employment of pregnant or nursing women except in accordance with their health condition.
• Article 39 considers work part of social rehabilitation and links it to good conduct.
• Article 65 grants inmates wages in cases of occupational illness or injury, applying social security provisions.
• Article 123 stipulates that work assignments must be appropriate to each inmate’s condition.

Provisions on discipline and strikes (articles 237, 238 of the Penal Code)

The Government notes that these provisions have not been applied in recent years and are under review to ensure they are not used to sanction peaceful participation in strikes or minor disciplinary breaches. It clarifies that imprisonment does not necessarily entail forced labour, as work in correctional institutions is regulated for rehabilitation purposes. Any legislative amendments will ensure full compliance with Article 1 of the Convention, which prohibits the use of forced labour as a means of labour discipline or punishment for participation in strikes, in line with Article 2 requiring the immediate and complete abolition of all forms of forced labour.

Reform efforts and international cooperation

The Government has, in recent years, introduced several amendments to national laws, reflecting steady progress in developing legislation consistent with international labour standards. These amendments are part of its commitment to strengthening fundamental rights and freedoms and ensuring harmonization of national legislation with relevant international Conventions, including the Convention.

Nevertheless, the political instability experienced during the transitional phase has delayed the completion of certain legislative reforms and postponed some practical steps in this regard. Despite these challenges, the Government remains committed to advancing legislative development, reflecting the State’s determination to move towards a legal framework more consistent with international labour standards.

Practical steps have been taken in this direction, including technical meetings between the Ministry of Labour and Rehabilitation and the Ministries of Justice, Interior and Foreign Affairs, as well as the establishment of a National Tripartite Committee comprising the Government, employers and workers to discuss harmonization of legislation with international Conventions. Work is under way to prepare a new Media Law, conduct a preliminary review of the Penal Code and the Anti-Cybercrime Law, and develop a plan to provide statistical data on prosecutions, convictions and penalties applied to enhance transparency.

The Government also expresses its appreciation for the technical assistance provided by the ILO, including the organization of a specialized workshop on forced labour. The Government responded positively to this initiative and values the role of the Organization in enabling constructive dialogue among social partners – Government, employers and workers – which has strengthened national efforts to align legislation and practice with the provisions of the Convention.

Conclusion

In submitting this report, the Government underscores that national legislation guarantees fundamental rights and freedoms, and that any ambiguity in application relates to practical interpretation of certain provisions, which are subject to careful legal review. The Government reiterates its readiness to continue cooperation with the ILO and requests technical assistance in drafting the necessary amendments to ensure full compliance with the Convention, thereby strengthening confidence in the country’s legal and institutional reform process.

Discussion by the Committee

Chairperson – We now turn to the case that we will examine today, which relates to the application of the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) by Libya. For the discussion of this case, we have 25 speakers on the list and on that basis the Officers have decided to reduce the maximum speaking time of delegations speaking on an individual basis from five to three minutes. I now invite the Government representative of Libya, the Director of the Libyan Labour Institute, to take the floor.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government representative – The Government expresses its appreciation for the efforts of the Committee of Experts in preparing the report and for the constructive observations it contains which contribute to strengthening compliance with international labour standards. The Government affirms that it pays close attention to all comments issued by the ILO supervisory bodies and treats them as an opportunity to support ongoing legislative review and development efforts in a manner that enhances full compliance with the provisions of the Convention.

The Government wishes to emphasize that the reference in the Convention to political opinions relates exclusively to cases in which forced labour is imposed as a punishment for peaceful political expression in accordance with Article 1(a) of the Convention. This is the specific technical scope of the Convention. This was confirmed by the 2012 General Survey, Giving globalization a human face, of the Committee of Experts, which noted in this regard that the Convention does not prohibit penalties involving compulsory labour for persons who use violence, incite violence or participate in preparatory acts aimed at violence. However, the penalties that fall within the scope of forced labour are those imposed on persons who are prohibited from expressing opinions or those opposing the existing political, social or economic system. Whether such prohibition is imposed by law or by discretionary administrative decision. Accordingly, our Government considers it important to maintain clarity regarding the scope of the Convention and to avoid attributing to it meanings that exceed its technical content.

The Government of Libya reaffirms its full commitment to the Convention and is keen to align its national legislation with its provisions. Its commitment under the Convention focuses on ensuring that forced labour is not imposed as a means of punishment or discipline. It is working to ensure clarity and consistency of the legal texts with the Convention in a manner that prevents any interpretation that could lead to the imposition of forced labour on those who express peaceful political opinions, while emphasizing at the same time that national criminal legislation targets acts that fall within the protection of public order or public security in accordance with the law and not the mere peaceful expression of opinion. The Government clarifies that the legal provisions contained in the Penal Code are all subject to thorough legal review within the framework of updating national legislation with the aim of removing any ambiguity and ensuring clarity of the text in a manner that prevents any interpretation that could lead to the imposition of forced labour on those who peacefully express political opinions. The Government also wishes to point out that the Constitutional Declaration of 2011 which constitutes the governing constitutional framework of the State of Libya guarantees equality among citizens without discrimination on the basis of political opinions and affirms respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and the Government’s commitment to relevant international Conventions.

Accordingly, any existing legislative provisions are interpreted and applied in light of these constitutional guarantees, otherwise they are void and they are currently under review to enhance their full consistency with the Government’s international obligations, including with the Convention. The application of criminal provisions is subject to judicial oversight and to the guarantees of a fair trial, including respect for established constitutional principles. The Constitutional Declaration has established a system based on separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary during the transitional phase.

In confirmation of this, the Declaration guarantees freedom of opinion and expression, as well as freedom of the press and publication in article 14. It also a affirms equality before the law without discrimination on the basis of political opinions in article 6, commits to respect for human rights and international Conventions in article 7, and recognizes the right to work for every citizen together with other economic and social rights in article 8. In addition, the Declaration provides in article 31 that there shall be no crime or punishment except as prescribed by law and guarantees the right to a fair trial. Furthermore, article 32 affirms the independence of the judiciary and prohibits the establishment of exceptional courts.

In the same context, the draft Constitution adopted by the Constitutional Drafting Assembly stipulates in article 34 the State’s commitment to protecting human dignity and combating torture, cruel, degrading and inhuman treatment, forced disappearance, and all forms of slavery, servitude and human trafficking. It further provides that such crimes are not subject to prescription and prohibits forced labour, except in cases of necessity or pursuant to a sentence issued by a court. In addition, the Labour Relations Law No. 12 of 2010 provides as follows: article 1 – labour relations among citizens in the Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya are free relations aimed at eliminating wage slavery. Article 2 prohibits coercion, forced labour, and all forms of injustice and exploitation, and affirms that work is a right and a duty based on equality among citizens. Article 3 affirms that access to employment, occupations and professions shall be based on competence, merit and qualifications and prohibits favouritism or discrimination on the grounds of union affiliation or social origin. Article 5 defines forced labour as any work or service that any person is compelled to perform under the threat of a penalty and for which that person has not volunteered to undertake of his or her own free will.

Accordingly, the Labour Relations Law No. 12 of 2010 explicitly affirms that work is a right based on freedom and choice and strictly prohibits coercion, forced labour and manifestations of injustice and exploitation. It also includes a definition of forced labour that is consistent with established ILO principles and limits exceptions to internationally recognized circumstances, including work performed under judicial supervision in execution of a judicial sentence. The Government reaffirms that imprisonment does not necessarily imply forced labour. Work performed within correctional and rehabilitation institutions is administered in accordance with humanitarian and legal rules, and aims at rehabilitation and social reintegration in line with Article 1 of the Convention, which prohibits the use of forced labour as a means of discipline or as punishment for participation in strikes.

The General People’s Committee has issued the Executive Regulations of Correction and Rehabilitation Institutions No. 168 of 2005. The Executive Regulations confirm that work within these institutions is not a compulsory punishment but is organized under human and legal standards aimed at rehabilitation and social reintegration.

Article 8 requires medical examination to determine the inmate’s ability to work. Article 30 prohibits the employment of pregnant or nursing women except in accordance with their health condition. Article 39 considers work as part of social rehabilitation and links it to good conduct. Article 65 grants inmates wages in cases of illness or occupational injury applying social security provisions. Article 123 provides that work assignments are made on the basis of the appropriate inmate’s condition.

With regard to sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, which relate to discipline and strikes, these provisions have not been applied since 2011. The country has indeed witnessed several peaceful strikes, particularly in the education sector and in certain production and service units, carried out within the framework of the rights guaranteed by the Constitutional Declaration. These provisions are also currently under legislative review to ensure that they cannot be interpreted or applied in a manner inconsistent with the provisions of the Convention.

The Government expresses its readiness to provide the Committee of Experts with further information on the application in practice of the provisions including, available data on relevant cases and judicial decisions, within the framework of the constructive dialogue and ongoing cooperation with the ILO’s supervisory bodies.

The Government has, in recent years, introduced several amendments to its national law in consultation with its social partners, reflecting continued progress in developing legislation in line with international labour standards. The Government affirms that these legislative reforms form part of its commitments to strengthening fundamental rights and freedoms and ensuring the conformity of national legislation with the relevant international Conventions including Convention No. 105.

However, the political instability and the transitional phase that Libya continues to undergo have affected the acceleration of some legislative reforms and delayed certain practical steps in this regard. The Government affirms its commitment to continuing the development of its legislative framework in a manner that reflects the State’s determination to advance towards a legal system more aligned with international labour standards. Specific steps have been taken in this direction through technical meetings and legal consultations between the Ministry of Labour and Rehabilitation and the Ministries of Justice, Interior and Foreign Affairs. In addition, a National Tripartite Committee comprising representatives of the Government, employers and workers has been established to examine the alignment of legislation with international Conventions. A new media law is being prepared and a preliminary review of the Penal Code is under way.

The Government expresses its appreciation for the technical support provided by the Office and particularly values the specialized workshop on forced labour held in May, which contributed to enhancing dialogue among social partners and supporting national efforts to bring national legislation and practices in line with the provisions of the Convention.

In conclusion, the Government reaffirms its firm commitment to the application of the Convention and to the continued review and development of its national legislation with a view to ensuring full alignment with international labour standards. It also reaffirms its full openness to dialogue and technical cooperation with the ILO and its supervisory bodies. It values the observations submitted by Committee members and social partners as positive contributions supporting reform and development efforts. The Government remains committed to continuing its work to address the concerns raised and to strengthen the relevant legal and institutional safeguards, thereby reinforcing respect for fundamental rights at work and enhancing full compliance with international Conventions ratified by the State of Libya.

Employer members – The Employer members stress the importance of ILO Member States’ compliance with the ten core Conventions, including Convention No. 105, which is a fundamental Convention that aims to abolish certain forms of forced or compulsory labour constituting violations of the human rights referred to in the Charter of the United Nations. The eradication of forced labour is an obligation under international law applying to all ILO members: employers, workers and governments. By way of background, the Government ratified the Convention in 1961. So far, the Committee of Experts has provided six observations on this case, namely in 2010, 2016, 2018, 2022, 2024 and more recently in 2025. This is the first time that the Committee is looking at the application of the Convention in Libya. Concerning the procedural obligation of Libya, the Employer members note that Libya was included this week in the list of countries that have failed to provide information in response to the comments of the Committee of Experts. We are aware of the challenges the country is going through, but we recall that complete, accurate and timely reporting remains an essential element of the ILO supervisory system and is essential to enable effective supervision of the application of ratified Conventions and meaningful dialogue among governments and the social partners.

Concerning the case before this Committee, we note that the Committee of Experts has identified one main issue, which is the legislative provisions concerning sanctions involving the obligation to work as a punishment for the expression of political views or views ideologically opposed to the established social or economic system, which is contrary to Article 1(a) of the Convention. Specifically, the Committee of Experts highlights three critical areas requiring correction: certain provisions of the Publications Act No. 76, 1972 and the Penal Code, the Penal Code’s broad restrictions, and the Anti-Cybercrime Law, 2022, which introduces vague parameters regarding digital data that threaten public security.

We further note that the United Nations Fact-Finding Mission on Libya, which took place in 2023, provided concerning findings that the Libyan authorities have restricted fundamental rights, including freedom of assembly, association, expression and belief. The report of the Fact-Finding Mission indicates that individuals have been detained for expressing criticism of the State and for holding divergent political, religious or social views. We note the Committee of Experts’ deep concern at the current human rights situation in the country if measures are enforced by sanctions involving compulsory labour. The State has a duty to prevent forced labour. Therefore, it is particularly concerning when the State itself is involved.

The Employer members strongly oppose violations of the Convention and are committed to upholding fundamental labour principles to ensure forced labour is not tolerated. The Employer members take the finding of the Committee of Experts very seriously but, as we heard, to ensure a balanced perspective we should not consider the case of Libya in a vacuum. Rather, it is important to consider also the current national reality that Libya is facing. Libya is currently navigating a period of volatility, characterized by ongoing political instability and security challenges. We recognize that the volatility has placed a disproportionate burden on Libya’s institutional capacity in infrastructure. However, we also note that it is precisely during such a complex period that clear legislative safeguards conforming to the Convention can provide a helpful foundation for sustainable recovery and stability.

The Employer members further note that the Government, in its written information, considers the Constitutional Declaration of 2011. It serves as the supreme reference during the transitional phase and implicitly supersedes conflicting laws that could be interpreted as restricting press freedom or imposing forced labour, including the provisions of Publications Act No. 76 of 1972. While the Employer members welcome this overarching constitutional commitment, we also note that implicit repeal may be insufficient to provide true legal certainty on the ground.

In practice, as long as contradicting provisions remain written in the Publications Act No. 76, 1972 and the Penal Code, the risk of misinterpretation or misapplication remains. Therefore, we urge the Government to translate the spirit of the Constitutional Declaration into concrete, explicit legislative amendments that formally repeal or amend relevant provisions of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 and the Penal Code, to bring them into conformity with the Convention.

The Employer members note from the Government’s written information that it is working to guarantee clarity in legal texts and their conformity with the Convention, so as to prevent any interpretation that could lead to the imposition of forced labour on persons peacefully expressing political or intellectual views. We, as Employer members, welcome this commitment of the Government.

We note that, following the 2025 Committee’s discussion on the application by the Government of a different but related Convention – the Forced Labour Convention (No. 29), 1930 – the Government requested technical assistance from the Office to address the Committee’s conclusions and to strengthen the capacity of the tripartite constituents on international labour standards-related topics. We further note that an initial field mission took place in Tripoli from 17 to 21 May 2026, serving as a very important point of progress. We view that this process presents a timely opportunity for the Government to demonstrate its commitments to international labour standards.

The Employer members urge the Government to engage further with the Office to expand its technical assistance to effectively address and implement the upcoming conclusions of this Committee regarding the application the Convention. In light of the Committee of Experts’ six previous observations regarding this Convention, we urge the Government to transition from dialogue into concrete action and, specifically, we call for a road map with a timeline to bring the identified legislation of Libya and actual practice into alignment with the Convention, by ensuring its effective and ongoing implementation within its national territory.

Worker members – We appear before this Committee today to examine Libya’s application of the Convention - a fundamental Convention the effective implementation of which lies at the very heart of the ILO’s mandate and credibility. The Convention establishes a clear and unequivocal obligation: to abolish forced or compulsory labour in all its forms, particularly when used as a means of political coercion, punishment for the expression of views, labour discipline or discrimination. This is a Convention that does not tolerate ambiguity or partial compliance. Its requirements apply at all times and under all circumstances, including during periods of institutional fragility or political transition.

Today, this case is being examined by the Committee because the Libyan criminal justice system sets forth that persons who express certain political views or positions that are ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system may be punished by imprisonment involving compulsory labour. Various provisions of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 show this to be the case. Civil servants or public sector workers may even be imprisoned, with sentences that include compulsory prison labour, as a penalty for breaches of labour discipline or for their participation in collective action.

As worker members, we are deeply concerned that freedom of expression and freedom of association, which are fundamental human rights, are being violated in this way. Furthermore, not only are people being imprisoned but their sentences also include the obligation to work, which amounts to forced labour. Even in cases of prison sentences of one year or more, the judge can order that the sentence involves compulsory labour.

Although the Committee of Experts has been highlighting this problem for at least a decade, without a satisfactory reply, the Government has meanwhile adopted the 2022 Anti-Cybercrime Act. This Act criminalizes the exchange of information and opinions which may threaten public safety or peace, providing for prison terms that may, once again, involve compulsory labour. Several United Nations experts have expressed concern about the vague and broad character of several of the provisions in this Act, which could lead to its discriminatory application against journalists, human rights defenders, activists and civil society actors in general. We have already noted that union leaders are victims of repeated attacks for voicing their opinions.

Our concerns are further confirmed by the report of the United Nations Independent Fact-Finding Mission on Libya of 3 March 2023, which emphasizes that the authorities, especially the Internal Security Agency, restrict the rights to assembly, association, expression and belief – aimed at ensuring obedience and reinforcing values and standards that serve their own interests – and punish criticism of the authorities and their leaders. This implies that human rights and fundamental rights are violated simultaneously: first through the restriction on freedom of expression and association and then through the imposition of compulsory labour.

The Worker members wish to underscore that the issues raised by the Committee of Experts go beyond mere statements of principle. The Convention requires that the law be entirely free of ambiguity and that it be effective in practice. General constitutional provisions or broad declarations of intent are insufficient if they do not result in specific legal regulations that clearly ban forced labour in all its prohibited forms and provide for effective penalties and remedies in case of violation.

In its comments, the Committee of Experts has emphasized the importance of ensuring that all work performed under the authority or supervision of the State conforms fully with the Convention. This includes situations in which work may be imposed in situations relating to detention, under emergency measures or under other forms of compulsory service. Any system that authorizes the imposition of labour under the threat of punishment, without genuine consent and without solid legal safeguards, is in violation of the Convention.

The persistence of these shortcomings is particularly worrying given that this is a fundamental Convention. It has an impact on the very core of human dignity and the rule of law. Where forced labour is not unequivocally prohibited or effectively prevented, it is the most vulnerable people who suffer its consequences disproportionately: workers placed under the authority of public bodies, persons deprived of liberty and those who do not have the resources to challenge coercive practices.

We therefore join the Committee of Experts in requesting the Government to provide specific and detailed information on the legislative and practical measures adopted to ensure the total abolition of forced labour, as well as on the supervisory, enforcement and reporting procedures. We note that the Committee of Experts has also insisted on the importance of having effective penalties and remedies so that any violation of the Convention is not only prohibited on paper but is actually prevented and addressed in practice.

We also note that this is not an isolated matter. Libya was already under examination by this Committee at its previous session in 2025, at which conclusions were adopted that reflected the serious concerns raised by the supervisory bodies regarding the non-compliance with obligations relating to the exploitation of migrant workers through abusive practices akin to forced labour. The Human Rights Watch annual report confirms that this is still the case. Migrants in detention and other prisoners are sometimes sold – I repeat, sold – at auctions to work in construction or agriculture, without pay or solely in exchange for board and lodging, which amounts to the existence of a slave market.

Our conclusions adopted in 2025 highlighted the importance of constructive and sustained cooperation with the ILO. Such cooperation is essential to support implementation in a context where institutional capacities remain fragile. However, we reiterate that cooperation with the ILO is not an end in itself; it must lead to measurable progress, legislative clarity and effective protection for workers.

Repeated examinations relating to the same fundamental Convention, as we see today, reveal an urgent situation that requires us to step up the expectations on the Government, and we insist on close monitoring. The Worker members request the Government to take full account of the Committee of Expert’s conclusions and to provide all the information requested.

We call on the Government to adopt the measures necessary to ensure that no prison sentences are imposed on persons who, without having recourse to violence, express political opinions or views opposed to the established political, social or economic system, through the internet or other technological means, or otherwise, and to ensure that under no circumstances can forced labour be imposed during a prison sentence.

We therefore trust that the Government will ensure the effective abolition of forced labour in all its forms prohibited under the Convention, and that its response will reflect the urgency of the situation. To this end, direct support from the ILO appears essential. We also urge the Government to follow up on the conclusions of the Committee, adopted in 2025, and to take urgent and effective measures to put an end to the arbitrary detention and exploitation of migrants, and to prevent them from being subjected to forced labour.

Interpretation from Arabic: Worker member, Libya – I’m speaking on behalf of the workers of Libya and we wish to begin by extending our appreciation to the Committee of Experts for all its work and we also appreciate the work of the Committee and we are deeply convinced that trade union rights are a fundamental pillar of social justice, of stability and of good labour relations. These obligations form an integral part of the obligations that Libya has assumed internationally. For many years Libya has faced significant political, economic and social challenges with a profound impact on labour institutions. In this context, the trade union movement in Libya has played its legitimate role in defending the rights of workers and demanding that their legitimate rights be respected. We commend what the State has done in seeking to revise national legislation to bring it into conformity with the Convention and other fundamental Conventions. We believe that any legal review must be carried out within the context of genuine social dialogue involving public authorities, workers and employers on an equal footing.

It is also necessary to develop the institutional legislative framework to provide more effective guarantees of freedom of association, trade union rights and all rights in general. We need to do this in order to ensure that we are fully in conformity with international labour standards. Looking at the world of work today in Libya, we recognize that the country is in a very difficult position. Many companies have gone bankrupt, investors and partners have withdrawn from the country in recent years. All of this has had an adverse effect on people’s lives and on their ability to feed themselves and indeed to earn a decent livelihood.

We therefore commend any effort undertaken by the Government to tackle this situation. We very much hope that decisions can be taken quickly to resolve many of the administrative and financial problems of workers who work for companies that have gone bankrupt. They need to have their rights restored – their economic rights in particular. This is a significant proportion of workers in Libya. Workers should not have to shoulder the consequences of bankruptcy or of withdrawal of investment. These workers and their families are a national responsibility and require an emergency solution to promote social justice – one of the ideals promoted and defended by the ILO. Workers in Libya want a fairer and freer labour market. They seek the protection of their wages. They want their social rights to be respected and they recognize that social dialogue is the way to achieve these goals and that of sustainable development.

We commend the efforts taken made by the Government and the measures adopted to extend social protection to workers. Yes, what has been done is modest but it is a step in the right direction. We need reform at all levels to guarantee that workers can fully enjoy their rights, including the right to work. We call upon the ILO to provide technical assistance to the Government and to social partners. This is necessary in order to ensure that national legislation can be fully in line with international labour standards.

There is one point that I would like to underscore strongly and unequivocally. One of the biggest problems faced by workers and the trade union movement in Libya is the political situation in the country and the divisions that continue to affect it. Measures are taken but they cannot be applied at the grassroots level particularly because of issues relating to sanctions. We do not wish to see our country on this list of cases before the ILO for any longer. We want to work with the ILO, with the Committee of Experts and other Committees.

We need technical assistance and training that can help us create decent jobs for all, and we want these objectives to be achieved through social dialogue in our country. We wish to conclude by reiterating our willingness to work and cooperate with the ILO and with employers’ associations. We all need to work together so that everyone can live in dignity without any forced labour and free from any restrictions that are incompatible with the founding principles of this Organization.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government member, Sudan speaking on behalf of the Arab group – On behalf of the Arab group and in the name of Sudan, we would like to offer our thanks for the efforts of the Committee of Experts who have drawn up this report with comments aimed at ensuring respect for international labour standards. We also want to express our support for the Government with the reform process and the reforms that are undertaken to respond to the comments of our Committee. The Government has demonstrated that it is committed to the provisions of the Convention because it is very careful to bring its national legislation into conformity with the provisions of the Convention so that no compulsory labour is imposed as a punishment and also to avoid any other way of sanctioning political dissent through compulsory labour.

We would like to underscore that a full legislative review was launched by the Government looking at all relevant legislation. This is guaranteed in the 2011 Constitutional Declaration. There is a draft Constitution which seeks to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms in the country and to ban any kind of forced labour. Therefore, we very much welcome the measures taken by the Government to promote rehabilitation and social reinsertion and to ensure that forced labour does not occur. These efforts demonstrate a commitment to addressing the issue through rehabilitation and social reintegration rather than punitive approaches. We see that in Libya there is a very difficult, challenging security and political situation at the moment that we need to bear in mind. Nevertheless, we note the establishment of a National Tripartite Committee, the holding of consultations with the relevant ministries, and the adoption of other measures aimed at improving transparency and advancing legislative reform.

Government member, Cyprus– I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its Member States. The candidate countries, North Macedonia, Montenegro, Albania and the Republic of Moldova, the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) country Norway, member of the European Economic Area, as well as the United Kingdom of Great Britian and Northern Ireland, align themselves with this statement.

The European Union and its Member States are committed to the respect, protection and fulfilment of human rights, including labour rights. We promote universal ratification and effective implementation of fundamental ILO Conventions and support the ILO supervisory system in its crucial role of promoting and supervising the application of ratified standards.

We remain seriously concerned by the human rights situation in Libya, in particular the restrictions of fundamental rights and liberties, including freedom of expression. In line with the Committee of Experts, we urge the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that no prison sentences involving compulsory labour are imposed on persons who, without having recourse to violence, express political opinions or views opposed to the established political, social or economic system.

We call on the Government to bring the provisions of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 into conformity with the Convention and to provide specific information on the application in practice of these provisions, including the number of cases prosecuted, the convictions brought, the facts that led to these convictions and the penalties applied.

In regard to the Anti-Cybercrime Law of 2022, we urge the Government to ensure that no one who expresses political opinions, including dissenting opinions, or any views through the internet or any other technological tool, can be sentenced to imprisonment and compulsory labour, as enshrined in the Convention.

We call on the Government to take measures to amend the provisions of the Anti-Cybercrime Law of 2022 in a way that will restrict their scope and prevent any interpretation in their application that could lead to the imposition of a penalty involving compulsory work on persons who express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system.

We note with interest the written information provided by the Government stating that the provisions contained in the Penal Code, the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 and the Anti-Cybercrime Law of 2022 are subject to thorough legal review to remove ambiguities and ensure clarity so that no interpretation may result in the imposition of forced labour on persons peacefully expressing political or intellectual opinions.

In the interim and while awaiting the outcome of the legislative process, we recommend the implementation of executive orders to ascertain the protection from forced labour. We encourage the Government to translate its commitment into action, in full conformity with the fundamental Convention, and to continue its cooperation with the ILO. The European Union and its Member States will follow the situation closely and remain ready to support efforts aimed at ensuring compliance with international labour standards and the abolition of forced and or compulsory labour.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government member, Tunisia – The delegation of my country welcomes the delegation of Libya and thanks it for the information provided regarding the country’s efforts concerning the application of the Convention. We appreciate the Government’s commitment to the Convention and the alignment of national laws with the provisions of the Convention, as well as efforts to ensure the clarity of legal texts through their revision and interpretation. We welcome the practical approaches taken in this regard. My country’s delegation also supports the Government’s request to the ILO for technical and financial assistance to draft the amendments necessary to ensure full compliance with the Convention, thus fostering confidence in the country’s institutional and legal reform process. My delegation welcomes the commitments and efforts of the Government to comply with international standards while taking account of the comments and conclusions of this Committee and the Committee of Experts.

Worker member, France – I take the floor on behalf of the French, Nordic and Belgian workers. The figures are unequivocal: between 2005 and 2025, more than 40 journalists and bloggers were killed in Libya. In 2024, at least five journalists were imprisoned, and 488 violations against journalists were recorded between 2014 and 2024. In 2024, Libya was ranked 143rd out of 180 countries in Reporters Without Borders’ World Press Freedom Index. And journalists are not the only ones being repressed. In July 2024, the United Nations Support Mission in Libya registered at least 60 people held because of their actual or alleged political affiliations – and this figure is likely an underestimate.

These are not isolated incidents but instead part of a system in which detention is used as a weapon against freedom of expression. The Committee of Experts has identified three laws: the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972, the Criminal Code and the 2022 Anti-Cybercrime Act. This jurisprudence constitutes the legal framework for a repressive system designed to silence those who voice their opinions, because anyone imprisoned under these provisions for peacefully exercising their right to freedom of expression, as is their legal right, is subjected to forced labour.

Forced labour also affects migrants and refugees detained in Libya. Since 2016, the United Nations has documented a system in which thousands of migrants (men, women and children) are forced to carry out unpaid labour in official detention centres or in informal premises controlled by armed groups. This work is imposed under threat of violence and is sometimes presented as a condition for reducing the ransom or securing release.

The link between the suppression of freedom of expression and the forced labour of the most vulnerable groups is a structural one. When journalists are silenced, abuses cannot be documented, denounced or made public. When labour rights activists are imprisoned and subjected to forced labour, the most vulnerable workers lose their last defenders. And this situation is exacerbated by impunity. Arbitrary detention, forced disappearances, torture and deaths in detention persist, all the while fuelling a climate of fear and weakening the rule of law. In 2024, two people died in detention at the Internal Security Agency in suspicious circumstances, but no independent inquiry was opened into these two deaths. For the workers, the consequences of the systemic repression are decisive. A system that reduces journalists to silence, criminalizes activists and imprisons trade unionists destroys the ecosystem that defends workers’ rights.

We call on the Government to respond by implementing a comprehensive legislative reform, establishing accountability, and creating the conditions that allow freedom of expression, freedom of association and workers’ rights to be exercised without fear.

Government member, Switzerland – Switzerland supports the statement made by the European Union and wishes to make the following points.

Switzerland notes the Government’s information regarding its intention to bring national legislation into line with the Convention but expresses deep concern at the repeated comments of the Committee of Experts regarding Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 and certain provisions of the Criminal Code.

We are particularly concerned that these provisions allow for the expression of political opinions or ideological opposition to be punished with prison sentences. Switzerland also regrets that, in cases of a prison sentence of one year or more, the judge may order that the sentence involve compulsory labour, which raises serious concerns with regard to the Convention.

Switzerland notes with deep concern that the new 2022 Anti-Cybercrime Act contains provisions providing for penalties involving forced labour. We note with concern the vague and very broad nature of several of its provisions, particularly those relating to “public safety” and “morality,” which could lead to broad and discriminatory application, particularly against journalists, human rights defenders and civil society actors. Switzerland notes with deep concern that these details are part of a wider context of increasing suppression, marked by arbitrary arrests and smear campaigns.

Against this backdrop, Switzerland urges the Libyan authorities to, without delay, take all measures necessary to ensure that no person can be sentenced with a penalty involving compulsory work for expressing political views or critical positions in a non-violence manner. We also urge the Government to carry out an in-depth revision of Act No. 76 of 1972 on publications and the Act against cybercrime to ensure alignment of this legislation with the Convention and to prevent any abusive application or interpretation.

Lastly, Switzerland encourages the Government to provide detailed and transparent information on the specific application of these provisions, particularly the number of cases, prosecutions initiated and penalties imposed.

Worker member, Argentina – I am speaking on behalf of the workers of Argentina, the workers of Italy and the confederations of Uruguay, with deep concern at the non-compliance reported with respect to the Convention in Libya.

The Convention specifically prohibits the use of any form of forced or compulsory labour as a means of political coercion or education or as punishment for expressing political views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. Libya ratified the Forced Labor Convention, 1930 (No. 29) and Convention No. 105 in 1961. However, United Nations reports, including that of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, reveal that Libyan detention centres are often run by non-state actors and armed groups acting outside the law. Within these facilities, migrants, refugees and political opponents suffer serious abuses, including forced labour and blackmail.

In this regard, it should be noted that an extremely serious situation is currently unfolding: Argentinian, Italian, Tunisian, United States, Uruguayan, Spanish and Portuguese citizens who are part of a humanitarian mission to deliver aid to Gaza, are being held in Benghazi precisely for reasons related to their political views. However, despite the fact that a humanitarian aid mission does not imply any kind of crime, they were arrested and illegally detained, and subjected to mistreatment, abuse and a lack of legal and medical assistance. Today, this group of citizens is on hunger strike, claiming respect of their rights.

We therefore demand that the Government immediately release the illegally held citizens and respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, including freedom of expression, and that it comply with the ILO Conventions, taking the measures necessary to ensure that no one is imprisoned or subjected to forced labour for the mere fact of expressing political opposition, without resorting to violence.

Worker member, Poland – I am speaking on behalf of NSZZ Solidarność. On 27 September 2022, the Anti-Cybercrime Law, 2022 was issued. NSZZ Solidarność observes that the Committee of Experts notes that certain provisions of this Anti-Cybercrime Law, 2022 criminalize behaviours with a prison sentence which involves compulsory labour. NSZZ Solidarność shares concerns expressed by United Nations experts and Libyan civil society organizations that the vague and broad nature of a number of the provisions of this law may lead to their discriminatory application against journalists, human rights defenders, activists and civil society actors who express dissenting views or publish, share or comment on information about the Government, its policies or actions, with such criticism being liable to interpretation as threatening to “public security or peace” or “public order or morality”. NSZZ Solidarność observes that the Anti-Cybercrime Law, 2022 was drafted without consultation with the Libyan civil society. Libyan citizens became aware of this new Law when a copy of the draft was leaked in October 2021 on social media.

Throughout the whole process of its development, the legislators working on the draft law did not consult with any relevant actors of civil society or the legal community and did not give prior knowledge of it to the Libyan public.

NSZZ Solidarność shares the concerns that this Anti-Cybercrime Law, 2022 can restrict basic rights such as freedom of opinion and expression, the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association, and lead to arbitrary arrests. Seven men aged between 19 and 29 were arbitrarily arrested and detained by the Internal Security Agency in 2021 and 2022 for using social media to propagate atheism and contempt for religion. Four of these men were sentenced to three years’ imprisonment with hard labour. In February 2023, the Libyan authorities arrested a singer and an online content creator, both women, for allegedly violating that law and for violating “honour and public morals”.

NSZZ Solidarność shares the Committee of Experts’ concern that exercising the right to freedom of expression may be penalized through sanctions of imprisonment involving compulsory labour. NSZZ Solidarność supports the Committee of Experts’ recommendations and urges the Government to take immediate measures, both in law and practice, to put an end to any violation of the Convention, by ensuring that no one who expresses political opinions, including dissenting opinions, or any views through the internet or any other technological tool, can be sentenced to imprisonment, under the terms of which compulsory labour is imposed.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government member, Morocco – At the outset, we express our appreciation for the efforts of the Committee of Experts in formulating reports, comments and objective recommendations that help to ensure respect for international labour standards and promote constructive dialogue between the Member States and the ILO supervisory bodies. We also thank the Government for the information and clarifications provided, which reflect its positive reception and attention to the comments, and its cooperation with the supervisory mechanisms. We have followed with interest the data provided by the Libyan delegation, and we note that some of it relates to the modernization of the institutional and legislative system that is relevant to the provisions of the Convention.

We appreciate the efforts made to promote fundamental labour rights under exceptional conditions, which illustrate that work towards these reforms is a positive indication of the Libyan authorities’ commitment to ensuring alignment with international labour standards.

We note that the Libyan authorities have not only prohibited forced labour but have revised the relevant legal texts to ensure alignment with the requirements of the Convention, particularly with regard to the protection of fundamental freedoms and the prohibition of any practices that could lead, directly or indirectly, to the imposition of forced labour. We positively note the information on the legal and constitutional guarantees for the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms aimed at strengthening equality before the law and judicial independence.

Work in reform institutions is being performed as part of social rehabilitation measures and according to clear legal rules, in order to pursue the reform through national mechanisms that bring all the social partners together.

To conclude, we see that the procedural institutional and legislative measures presented to the Committee are positive indicators of a genuine will to harmonize legislation and practice at the national level, with the provisions of the Conventions. We therefore recommend that the Office provides technical assistance to the Government and affords it the time necessary to establish reforms and comply with the Convention.

Worker member, Japan – The Committee of Experts’ 2026 observation references the United Nations Fact-Finding Mission on Libya, which documented that the Internal Security Agency systematically detains individuals for criticizing the authorities. The cases reveal a pattern of punishment inside State facilities, outside judicial oversight, with complete impunity.

On 11 July 2024, journalist Ahamed Al-Senussi, editor-in-chief of the Sada Economic Newspaper and host of “Flusna" on Al-Wasat TV, was arrested in Tripoli by Internal Security Agency members. He had returned to Libya only the day before. The reason: he had published documents exposing corruption within the Ministry of Economy and Trade. He was held incommunicado for three days. According to his own public testimony, he was blind-folded, forced to kneel for hours, subjected to beatings, verbal abuse and the threats of sexual assault. He was coerced into recording a filmed “confession” that the Agency broadcast on its platform. He later said, “I testify that you destroyed my life with that video that my family watched.” He was released on 14 July 2024, without a single charge filed.

The United Nations Support Mission in Libya, the European Union delegation, the United States Embassy, the Committee to Protect Journalists and Libya Crimes Watch all condemned the arrest. Al-Senussi was released but fled to the Netherlands, unable to work inside Libya.

Let us be clear about what this case means under the Convention. Al-Senussi was arrested for economic journalism – for documenting corruption in a government institution. This is precisely the journalism that workers depend on. When journalists face detention, torture, coerced confession broadcast to their families and exile, the exploitation continues in the dark, protected by the silence that fear produces.

No one has been held accountable. No investigation has been opened. No charge was ever brought. The Internal Security Agency arrested him, tortured him, coerced his confession and released him with no consequence whatsoever. This is what impunity looks like in practice and it tells every worker, journalist and activist in Libya that the State can do this again, at any time, to anyone. We call on the Government to open an independent investigation into the torture allegations inside Internal Security Agency detention facilities, and to ensure that no journalist, worker or activist in Libya faces detention for peacefully expressing their views.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government member, Algeria – The Algerian delegation would like to thank the Libyan delegation for the detailed information provided on the implementation of the Convention, which reflects the Government’s efforts in this area. In this regard, Algeria encourages the Government to continue its fruitful efforts to address the comments on the application of this Convention and to continue the process of legislative and institutional reform already under way. Algeria welcomes the measures taken by the Libyan authorities to align national legislation with the provisions of the Convention in order to ensure that forced labour is not used as a means of punishment or to prevent freedom of expression and opinion.

We welcome the ongoing legislative revisions aimed at promoting legal safeguards for the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms, in accordance with Libya’s international commitments. Algeria appreciates the measures taken within reform and rehabilitation institutions to ensure that occupational activities related to social rehabilitation and reintegration comply with the principles underlying international labour standards.

We would like to mention a series of measures taken by the Libyan authorities, including the establishment of a national tripartite commission and the organization of technical consultations among the relevant bodies, the start of a review of the permanent legislative framework, and steps taken to promote transparency and dialogue. Algeria believes firmly that constructive dialogue and technical cooperation are the appropriate means of helping Member States to respect their international commitments. We therefore encourage cooperation to continue between the Government and the ILO in order to pursue and support the reforms under way, and to promote respect of the provisions of the Convention.

Interpretation from Arabic: Worker member, State of Palestine – The Committee of Experts’ observation on Libya identifies a legal framework that criminalizes certain forms of reporting, documentation and public commentary on workers, especially the most vulnerable. This has implications that go beyond the fate of the individual journalist. It reduces the external visibility of abuses that often affect the most vulnerable workers and weakens one of the few mechanisms through which cases of forced labour and exploitation can be brought to public attention.

Reporters Without Borders ranked Libya 143rd out of 180 countries in its 2024 World Press Freedom Index. At least five journalists were imprisoned in 2024. Under Libyan law, these imprisonments may carry sentences of compulsory hard labour imposed for journalistic activities. Each prison sentence removes a reporter who was in many cases the only available channel through which exploitation of workers could reach public attention. This directly affects labour rights.

Libya hosts hundreds of thousands of migrant workers, many in conditions of debt bondage, wage theft and physical confinement that meet any definition of forced labour. The only mechanism through which their situation becomes visible to the international community is often the documentation provided by journalists, non-governmental organization workers and activists. When those documenting such abuses are imprisoned under the Penal Code and the Anti-Cybercrime Act, as identified by the Committee of Experts, the exploitation they were recording continues in darkness. Forced labour does not disappear because it is not reported.

It worsens as impunity grows in proportion to invisibility. Each journalist imprisoned under these provisions is not merely a victim of measures that raise concerns under the Convention. The imprisonment of such journalists may also indirectly facilitate the continuation of forced labour and exploitation that their work sought to expose. We urge the Government to release all journalists detained for carrying out reporting activities and to enact the legislative reforms that the Committee of Experts has repeatedly requested.

Employer member, Algeria – I am speaking on behalf of my employer organization: the Council for the Economic Recovery of Algeria (CREA). At the outset, I would like to say that we fully appreciate the work of the Committee of Experts, particularly the comments made in its report, which we consider constructive and useful for strengthening compliance with international labour standards.

Based on our exchanges with our Libyan economic partners, we consider that there is a strong will on their part to actively participate in the reconstruction of their economy, while improving working conditions for regular workers.

With regard to the Convention, the partners have stated that their Government is firmly committed to amending Libyan legislation to exclude all forms of forced labour as punishment or means of coercion. They also reported the measures taken in reform and rehabilitation centres in order to ensure that the work performed there is part of social reintegration and not compulsory penalty.

We have confidence in our Libyan partners who sometimes describe impossible situations related to the instability and fragility of the institutions.

Despite the difficult circumstances the country is facing, our Libyan partners trust in their Government’s efforts, particularly:

• the examination and revision of the legislation;
• initiatives aimed at increasing transparency and good governance.

Therefore, if the Libyan social partners have confidence in their Government, we must also follow through with the technical support put in place to enable this country to uphold social justice and decent work for the long-term. We also encourage the continuation of reforms and dialogue with a view to ensuring full conformity with international labour standards.

Government member, South Africa – South Africa expresses its appreciation to the Committee of Experts for its thorough report and for the constructive comments it contains. The work of the Committee of Experts remains central to strengthening compliance with international labour standards and ensuring the dignity of all workers. The Committee of Experts’ comments provide a useful basis for continued dialogue.

South Africa recognizes that the Government is engaged in a process of reform and has taken certain steps regarding the Convention. At the same time, the Committee of Experts’ findings point to remaining gaps between legal provisions and actual practice, including indications that forced labour may still be used as a punishment or disciplinary measure in ways warranting further review. The Convention sets out clear expectations, and where ambiguity in legislation or practice remains, there would be value in continuing attention to these issues. South Africa notes the Government’s constitutional and legislative commitments to this area, including provisions within the 2011 Constitutional Declaration and the draft Constitution. The translation of these commitments into everyday practice, including in detention settings, is an ongoing process. Our delegation acknowledges the difficult circumstances Libya continues to face. We know the establishment of the National Tripartite Committee and the review of relevant legislation as examples of steps being taken.

To conclude, we encourage the Government to continue working with the ILO through its technical cooperation programmes to address the Committee of Experts’ concerns and to report concrete steps at the next session.

Worker member, Zimbabwe – The Convention was not adopted to protect abstract legal categories. It was adopted to protect people, and specifically to protect those who are most vulnerable when the State uses compulsory labour as a tool of control.

In Libya today, that vulnerability falls most heavily on ordinary workers. The Committee of Experts has identified the foundational problem clearly, which is that under the Penal Code, imprisonment expressly entails compulsory hard labour. Any provision that sends a person to prison for the peaceful expression of political or social views is, therefore, simultaneously a provision that imposes forced labour for those views. The Publications Act No. 76 of 1972, multiple Penal Code articles, and the 2022 Anti-Cybercrime Act all create exactly this consequence. There is a direct impact on workers.

A worker who speaks out about unsafe conditions, unpaid wages or discriminatory treatment at the workplace, and whose complaint is characterized by an employer or authority as criticism of public institutions or as damaging to the State, can be prosecuted under these provisions. If convicted, he or she faces imprisonment, which under Libyan law means compulsory hard labour. The threat alone is sufficient to silence grievances. Forced labour does not only occur inside prison walls, it also occurs in every workplace where workers are silenced by the fear of that legal consequence.

In December 2022, four members of a civil society organization were sentenced to three years’ imprisonment with hard labour for expressing secular and feminist views. The Committee of Experts cited these cases directly. They were not criminals. They were individuals who exercised their right to express their views. Yet the punishment for speaking out was hard labour, the very same mechanism that can be deployed against any worker whose voice the State finds inconvenient.

We call on the Government to urgently amend the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 and the relevant Penal Code provisions, and to ensure that no worker in Libya faces imprisonment with compulsory labour as a consequence of peaceful expression.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government member, Saudi Arabia – The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia expresses its appreciation of the efforts by the Committee of Experts in presenting their report and the observations that are conducive to further compliance to international labour standards. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia also supports the Government in its reform process and its ongoing efforts to promote the legislative and institutional framework, thus enshrining the protection of human rights, basic freedoms and the rule of law. These efforts reaffirm the commitment of the Government to the Convention through its harmonization with its national legislation. The Kingdom also would like to reaffirm the importance of the continuing cooperation of the Committee with the Government and reaffirms the necessity to respect its national and international specificity and their efforts.

Worker member, South Africa – The Committee of Experts’ 2026 observation identifies the Anti-Cybercrime Law, 2022 as a major new concern. For workers and the labour rights defenders, it represents a qualitative expansion of the threat that they already face. Before this law existed, workers and activists who documented exploitation, illegal labour practices, wage theft and safe working conditions could be prosecuted under the Penal Code provision the Committee of Experts has long flagged. The Anti-Cybercrime Law, 2022 added an entirely new layer. It criminalizes online content deemed threatening to public security or social peace with penalties of up to 15 years of imprisonment. In a legal system where imprisonment means compulsory hard labour, this translates directly into a threat of forced labour for anyone who publishes information online about labour conditions that authorities find inconvenient.

The chilling effect is immediate and real. In 2021, blogger Hamza al-Treki was arrested after uploading a video criticizing the Prime Minister and held for four months without trial. In 2024, journalist Ayed Abdeljalil was imprisoned twice, on separate occasions, for Facebook posts denouncing corruption and racial discrimination. Between arrests, he remained under judicial supervision. These individuals did what workers and their advocates need to do. They documented, they reported, they raised their voices.

The legal system responded with arrests and imprisonment. For workers in Libya, particularly migrant workers, informal sector workers, and those in sectors where exploitation is documented, the effect is devastating. Those who might report abuses, contact a journalist, or post evidence of exploitation online are now facing the risk of criminal prosecution under a law so broadly worded that virtually any critical content can be captured within it. Forced labour thrives in silence. This law enforces that silence.

We call on the Government to repeal or fundamentally redraft the Anti-Cybercrime Law, 2022, removing all criminal penalties for peaceful expression, and to ensure that workers and labour rights defenders can report exploitation without fear of prosecution. We also call on the Government to ensure compliance with Article 6 of the United Nations Convention against Cybercrime, which provides that States parties should ensure the implementation of their obligations under the Convention and that they should be consistent with their obligations under international human rights law.

Government member, Niger – Niger notes the report of the Committee of Experts and the constructive comments therein, which contribute to strengthening international labour standards.

Our delegation welcomes the steps and efforts of Libya to follow up on these comments. We believe that the Government has demonstrated a clear commitment to the Convention and has showed diligence in aligning its national legislation with the provisions of the Convention, in order to combat forced labour and prevent any interpretation that may infringe the right to intellectual and political freedom of expression. We also welcome the in-depth examination of the relevant legislation carried out by the Government, as well as the safeguards provided under the 2011 Constitutional Declaration and the draft Constitution concerning the protection of the fundamental rights and freedoms, and the prohibition of all forms of forced labour.

Niger appreciates the measures taken by the Government within the correctional and rehabilitation institutions to ensure that the work performed there is not a compulsory penalty but rather part of programmes aimed at social reintegration and rehabilitation. We also welcome the specific measures taken by the Government despite the exceptional circumstances it is facing, particularly the establishment of a National Tripartite Committee, technical meetings among the ministries involved, the preparation of a new law on the media and the preliminary examination of the legislation, as well as Bills aimed at strengthening transparency.

To conclude, Niger invites the Office and the partners to provide the Government with the technical assistance required to continue efforts to implement the Convention through tripartite social dialogue.

Interpretation from Arabic: Observer, International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) – I represent the Libyan Workers’ Federation. I support the conclusion reached by the Committee of Experts regarding the continued punishment of individuals because of their political opinions or their peaceful expression of views and the related detention and sentences that may involve forced labour in places of detention, in violation of the provisions of the Convention. We also share the Committee of Experts’ concern regarding continuing restrictions of freedom of expression and the targeting of critics of Government policies, including trade unions and workers who have been prosecuted or detained because of their trade union activities; among them is Fathi Al-Bousaifi, President of the Air Traffic Controllers’ Union. However, I would like to draw attention to another aspect of the violations related to the application of the Convention in Libya, namely the use of employment and labour relations as a means of pressure or punishment against workers because of their political opinions, the criticism of corruption or their trade union activities. In a number of sectors and public institutions, cases have been reported involving the dismissal, termination of employment and forced transfer of workers without their consent, accompanied by threats that they would lose their jobs or sources of income if they refuse to comply with these decisions. One of the most significant examples concerns more than 1,000 workers of Libyan Airlines who were collectively dismissed under Ministerial Decision No. 146 following their criticism of corruption and of administrative and governmental policies.

A large number of them were also transferred to positions that did not correspond and deprived of their financial entitlements for more than three years. These measures were linked to the participation of some trade unionists and workers in peaceful protests and demands aimed at improving living conditions and combating corruption. A number of workers were also placed under what is known as “awaiting financial release” procedures, whereby workers remained for years without actual salaries or regular employment of their entitlements creating situations of coercive dependency and continuous economic pressure. A number of these workers submitted complaints to the labour inspection authority in Tripoli but these complaints were not accepted, raising serious concerns regarding the effectiveness and independence of labour law enforcement mechanisms. What is particularly concerning is not the collective dismissals, forced transfers or deprivation of wages but the use of employment itself and workers’ livelihoods as instruments of pressure and punishment because of opinions, positions or peaceful activities contrary to the protection guaranteed by the Convention.

In the same context, we are increasingly concerned about the implementation of the 2022 Anti-Cybercrime Act in a manner that, in practice, restricts freedom of expression and creates a climate of fear and self-censorship among workers and trade unionists accordingly. We request the Government to provide full information regarding these practices and to take the necessary measures to ensure that employment dismissal, transfer or deprivation of wages are not used as tools of pressure or punishment and to guarantee the independence of the labour inspection authority in Tripoli and throughout Libya as a whole.

We also call on the ILO to accept requests for a direct contacts mission to verify these allegations and hear directly from workers, their trade union organizations and the relevant authorities with a view to assessing actual compliance with the Convention. We would like to point out that there was an invitation to a workshop in May, where not all the social partners were involved. In particular, certain trade union representatives were denied participation, reportedly because they had called for demonstrations. We note that those who participated claimed to represent the National Federation of Libyan Trade Unions rather than the workers of Libya as a whole. This is testimony illustrating that not all social partners are currently able to participate fully in social dialogue processes in Libya.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government representative – We have duly taken note of all of the observations that have been made and we affirm that all positions and all comments will serve to enrich our dialogue and improve labour standards at the international level. We are fully committed to applying the Convention.

Its technical framework consists of abolishing forced labour and Article 2 of the Labour Code prohibits all forms of slavery or forced labour in general for all inhabitants and making sure that everyone is on an equal footing. We also have the intention of respecting freedom for all. This has been mentioned in a number of different reports. All of these issues do, however, need to be dealt with as part of the revision mechanism concerning human rights and this is why we call for the full respect of the technical framework of the Convention. We would also like to affirm that all national legislation including the Penal Code is currently undergoing a process of revision in detail to ensure that the laws we have are fully in conformity with the Convention.

We also wish to share with you the fact that the legislative framework adopted since 2011, together with the Labour Code of 2010, guarantees fundamental freedoms and prohibits all forms of forced labour and slavery. Furthermore, certain legislative provisions that have been linked to concerns relating to forced labour have not been applied since 2011. The Government submitted its report, last year during the International Labour Conference, in relation to the application of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29). On that occasion, we took into account the observation and the conclusions made by this Committee. It is therefore our view that Libya’s inclusion on the present list of cases is not justified. However, we wish to emphasize that the remarks made by Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee will be taken into account. The Government remains committed to respecting international labour standards and, in particular, the principle of tripartism.

The Government is fully committed to respecting international labour standards and the principles of labour, in particular the tripartite principle. We believe that there is an important issue that the ILO should address. It concerns the appearance in this Committee of the entity referred to as the General Federation of Libyan Trade Unions, speaking on behalf of the ITUC, which has not been recognized as a social partner and has no effective presence within Libya in terms of worker membership, founding structures or trade union organizations registered at the national level.

The presence of an entity presenting itself as a representative of workers, without being grounded in an established organizational mandate or a genuine membership base, raises legitimate questions regarding the extent to which such representation is consistent with the principles established by the ILO to ensure the participation of the three constituents in a manner that reflects their actual representativeness.

According to the information available to us, this entity was reportedly established outside Libya, during a training workshop held in Tunisia, with the participation of individuals who did not represent an established worker constituency. In our view, this raises concerns regarding the foundations and representativeness of certain trade union structures.

Since the adoption of Law No. 3 of 2023 on trade union organization, the Government has embarked on a process of rebuilding the trade union movement on sound democratic foundations. However, the existence of structures that lack an institutional basis or an effective presence on the ground has created confusion within the trade union landscape and has affected the ability of legitimately established trade unions to carry out their normal role within the country.

We believe that the necessary measures must be adopted to ensure that representation within this room is genuine and based on a clear set of rules in order to instil trust in International Labour Conference delegates. We do not wish to criticize any particular party but we believe that this is an essential principle. It protects workers and an important principle of tripartism upon which the work of the ILO is built.

Despite the challenges posed by the transitional period, the Government remains committed to the process of legislative reform through technical work and coordination among the competent ministries, as well as through the activation of the National Tripartite Committee; and we shall put in place national legislation in accordance with international principles. The Government also reiterates its openness to the technical assistance and support provided by the Office and reaffirms its commitment to providing statistical information relating to prison sentences. It further confirms its readiness to continue constructive cooperation in a manner that strengthens confidence in the ongoing process of legal and institutional reform.

Worker members – We thank all delegations for their contributions to this debate and particularly the Government representative for the information provided to the Committee. From the workers’ perspective, today’s debate has confirmed that there are still serious and long-standing concerns regarding Libya’s implementation of the Convention. The Convention leaves no room for exceptions when forced labour is used as a means of political coercion, punishment for the expression of opinions, labour discipline or discrimination. We recall that these obligations apply at all times and under all circumstances, including during periods of political transition or institutional fragility.

The discussion has emphasized that the main concern in this case relates to the use of criminal legislation and detention practices that allow for the imposition of compulsory labour on persons who, without having recourse to violence, express political opinions or views opposed to the established political, social or economic system. From the workers’ perspective, this affects the intersection between fundamental human rights and fundamental labour rights.

We are particularly concerned that, under the current legal provisions, a prison term may be imposed for the expression of certain views, and that this penalty may include compulsory labour. As the Committee of Experts has been highlighting repeatedly for some time: any system that allows for the imposition of compulsory labour as a consequence of the expression of political views is incompatible with the Convention.

The Worker members note with concern that, instead of resolving these long-standing problems, more recent legislative developments – such as the 2022 Anti-Cybercrime Act – have added further complexity. The adoption of new criminal provisions that set out prison terms involving compulsory labour raises serious questions of compatibility with the Convention, particularly when the scope of the criminalized acts is broad or vague. We consider that this further increases the risk of imposing forced labour despite its clear prohibition in the Convention.

The Worker members fully share the view of the Committee of Experts that general statements of principle are not sufficient. The Convention requires precision in the law and effectiveness in practice. The Criminal Code must clearly and explicitly exclude any possibility of imposing compulsory labour on grounds prohibited by the Convention. If not, workers and persons deprived of liberty remain exposed to serious risks of abuse. The Committee of Experts has also emphasized, and we fully agree, that any work performed under the authority or supervision of the State must be aligned with the Convention, including when in detention.

Deprivation of liberty must never be used as a way of being able to impose compulsory labour on any one without their genuine consent and without robust legal safeguards. Any practice of this kind jeopardizes human dignity and the rule of law.

Forced labour affects the most vulnerable people, particularly prisoners, migrants and others without the means necessary to challenge coercive practices. Wherever forced labour is not unequivocally prohibited or effectively prevented, it becomes an instrument of repression and exploitation that is incompatible with the values of the ILO.

The persistence of serious problems relating to the Convention confirms the need to address the question of forced labour in the context of detention and requires more urgent monitoring.

In this context, the Worker members fully support the repeated requests of the Committee of Experts for specific, detailed and updated information on the measures taken to give effect to the Convention, including with regard to detention practices, monitoring procedures and punishments. Without this information, it is impossible to evaluate whether progress is being made.

In the light of today’s discussion, and echoing the concerns and requests of the Committee of Experts, the Worker members wish to clearly state their conclusions and expectations.

Firstly, we urge the Government to urgently adopt specific legislative measures to ensure that no prison sentence involving compulsory labour can be imposed on persons who, without having recourse to violence, express political opinions or views opposed to the established political, social or economic system whether such expression is offline or through technological means.

Second, we urge the Government to urgently adopt specific legislative measures to ensure that no civil servant or public sector worker may be imprisoned including with sentences involving compulsory prison labour as a penalty for breaches of labour discipline or for their participation in collective action.

Third, we urge the Government to ensure that any work related to detention and any work performed under the authority of the State is fully in conformity with the Convention and that no compulsory labour is imposed under the threat of punishment and without genuine consent.

Fourth, we urge the Government to strengthen the supervisory, enforcement and reporting procedures to ensure that all practices that amount to forced or compulsory labour are investigated quickly and effectively punished.

Fifth, we reiterate the importance of constructive and sustained cooperation with the ILO. To this end, we urge the Government to accept a direct contact mission in Libya to ensure that all the measures taken are in conformity with the Convention.

Lastly, we hope that the Government will provide the Committee of Experts with comprehensive and clear information on the measures adopted in law and in practice to abolish forced labour in all its prohibited forms, including information on safeguards, remedies and penalties.

The Convention is binding and its requirements non-negotiable. We hope that the Government seizes this opportunity to demonstrate its commitment to the full and effective abolition of forced labour in accordance with its international obligations and in cooperation with the ILO supervisory bodies.

Employer members – I will try to be as brief as possible. The Employer members would like to thank the Government for its constructive participation in today’s discussion and for sharing its perspective with this Committee. As we move to close this discussion, the Employer members wish to reaffirm the shared critical importance that we place on full compliance with the Convention, including its Article 1(a) concerning the prohibition of sanctions involving an obligation to work as a punishment for the expression of political views or views ideologically opposed to established social, political or economic system. The observations raised by the Committee of Experts, particularly concerning the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972, certain provisions of the Penal Code and the Anti-Cybercrime Law, 2022 highlight important areas where legislative clarity is required to ensure full alignment with the Convention.

We have closely listened to the Government’s information about its current challenging national context. The Employer members understand Libya is navigating a very complex period of political and security transitions. We also heard in this discussion that, within that context, enterprises and workers are also suffering as businesses close, and investor confidence also declines in the process. This naturally places a grave burden on the Government’s institutional infrastructure and capacity to govern the country. While we take note of the serious environmental constraints, it is also the Employer members’ view that establishing clear and explicit legislative safeguards during such transitional times can help serve as a reassuring foundation for long-term stability, recovery and restoration of the confidence of investors and enterprises, and jobs for the workers.

While we welcome the Government’s commitment to the Constitutional Declaration of 2011 as the supreme guide, we believe that relying on implicit alignment alone may leave room for misinterpretation and misapplication of the Convention on the ground. To provide legal certainty and confidence to all parties, we call on the Government to take the positive spirit of the Constitutional Declaration and reflect it through explicit amendments to the relevant written texts of the Publications Act No. 76 of 197, the Penal Code and the Anti-Cybercrime Law, 2022. The Employer members reiterate that the recent ILO field mission to Tripoli from 17 to 21 May 2026 is indeed a constructive progression. We commend this openness to dialogue of the Government and the Government’s cooperation with the Office. We strongly urge the Government to sustain this momentum by expanding and deepening its cooperation with the Office to address the specific legislative elements discussed today under the framework of the Convention.

This brings me to my conclusion. While we note the political instability and security challenges that Libya is facing, the Employer members view this as critical for the Government to move forward with the practical implementation. The Employer members urge the Government to expand and deepen its work with the Office to establish a clear road map with a timeline and, on an urgent basis, to bring its national legislation as well as its practical implementation into full conformity with the Convention. We also call on the Government to ensure that a broad and inclusive social dialogue is adhered to throughout the legislative amendment process.

Chairperson – Let us conclude discussion of this case. I thank the Government representative of Libya and all the speakers who participated in the discussion.

Conclusions of the Committee

The Committee took note of the written and oral information provided by the Government and the discussion that followed.

The Committee noted with deep concern that the Government did not provide a reply to the previous comments of the Committee of Experts, and recalled the importance of complying with reporting obligations under the supervisory system.

The Committee stressed that all work carried out under the authority or supervision of the State must comply with the Convention and not be imposed under threat or coercion.

Taking into account the discussion, the Committee requested the Government to:

• take time-bound and concrete measures to ensure conformity of national legislation and practice with the Convention, in particular by amending the relevant provisions of the Publications Act of 1972, the Penal Code, and the Anti-Cybercrime Law of 2022, to ensure that no penalties involving compulsory labour are imposed for the peaceful expression of political or ideological views;
• ensure, in law and in practice, that no person is subjected to imprisonment involving compulsory labour as a result of the peaceful expression of political or ideological views; and
• strengthen the mechanisms to ensure that violations of the Convention are promptly investigated and sanctioned, and provide information on the progress achieved, including the number of cases processed, convictions brought, the facts that led to those convictions and penalties applied.

The Committee requested the Government to avail itself of the technical assistance of the ILO to effectively implement all of the Committee’s recommendations and to report to the Committee of Experts by 1 September 2026 on the measures taken to implement the above recommendations and the results achieved

Interpretation from Arabic: Government representative – Distinguished members of the Committee, the Government of National Unity of the State of Libya wishes to express its appreciation to the Committee for its observations and for the efforts made in examining the case concerning the implementation of the Convention. The Government reaffirms its full respect for the supervisory mechanisms of the ILO and its commitment to constructive cooperation with the Conference Committee and the Committee of Experts in a manner that strengthens compliance with international labour standards. With regard to the observations, the Government would like to make the following remarks.

The Government confirms its commitment to submit all reports required and indicates that the delay referred to by the Committee is due to exceptional circumstances related to the transitional period the country is going through. Of course, there are also the institutional challenges accompanying this process. The Government affirms that it will address this delay and submit comprehensive reports by the deadline of 1 September 2026. The Government also confirms that it has already initiated a review of several relevant pieces of legislation in line with the provisions of the Convention and these reviews are carried out in coordination and consultation with the National Tripartite Committee.

The Government denies the existence of any case in which punishment involving compulsory labour was imposed as a result of peaceful expression of opinion, and stresses that the provisions referred to have not been applied since 2001.

The Government is also working to strengthen mechanisms for investigation and follow-up on all investigations carried out. The Government welcomes the Committee’s invitation to benefit from ILO technical assistance and affirms its full readiness to enhance this cooperation through workshops and the strengthening of national capacity-building. The Government of Libya wishes to provide clarifications with regard to the indication that it did not provide a reply to the Committee of Experts. In fact, we did submit this information and it was discussed at this session. The Government considers that the conclusions may not take account of transmission or registration reports within previous sessions. It is not that we do not want to provide this information or cooperate with the Committee. The Government reaffirms that it has been fully committed and will continue to cooperate with your Committee and through official records of the ILO. The Government of the State of Libya reiterates its firm commitment to implement the provisions of the Convention – this is a reflection of the will of the State to respect freedoms and the rule of law. The Government affirms that these observations represent an important way of cooperating with this Committee and with the ILO.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1992, Publication: 79th ILC session (1992)

The Government has supplied the following information:

Act No. 5 of 1991 on the application of the principles of the Green Book, Act No. 20 of 1991 on the promotion of freedom and the Green Book proclaim the right of each citizen to freely express his opinion, and prohibits punishment which affects human dignity such as forced labour and long-term imprisonment. Section 2 of Act No. 5 of 1991 provides that the amendments of the legislation provided for under the preceding section must be drawn up within a period of one year from the date of publication of the Act. Thus all the provisions of the 1972 Publications Act and the Penal Code shall be amended to bring them into accordance with Acts Nos. 5 and 20 of 1991.

The Orders of the Higher Council of the Revolution and those concerning the trial of those responsible for corruption, the texts of which the Committee of Experts have requested, were adopted at the beginning of the revolution to resolve certain problems relating to the circumstances. Their operation ended when the problems referred to disappeared. They became null and void subsequent to the promulgation of Acts Nos. 5 and 20 of 1991.

In addition, a Government representative referred to the written information communicated by the Government, with regard to the request of the Committee of Experts for copies of the Orders of the Higher Council of the Revolution respecting the defence of the revolution and the judgement of those responsible for political and administrative corruption. These Orders were adopted at the beginning of the revolution only to deal with a unique situation that existed at the time. That situation no longer exists and since the adoption of Act No. 5 of 1991 on the application of the Green Book on human rights these Orders were no longer in force.

The Workers' members stated that it was difficult to make an accurate assessment of the situation on such an important Convention in the absence of texts of the laws and orders. They took due note of the oral and written information provided by the Government. They further noted that Acts Nos. 5 and 20 of 1991 provided for the possibility of amending the Publications Act of 1972 and several sections of the Penal Code as well as making Orders of the Higher Council of the Revolution null and void. They understood the problems faced by the Government in reporting on the application of Conventions. They hoped, however, that the Government representative would convey to his Government the concern of the Conference Committee about the delays experienced in providing information to the Committee of Experts. They strongly urged the Government to provide the required information to the Committee of Experts at its next session including the texts of Acts Nos. 5 and 20 of 1991 as well as amendments to the Publications Act of 1972 and the relevant sections of the Penal Code in order to ensure that full conformity of national legislation with the Convention would soon be attained.

The Employers' members regretted to note that no concrete proof of the changes requested by the Committee of Experts had been provided for several years. They noted that the Government had for many years given indications and promises of change, including a reference to the formation of a tripartite national committee to look into these problems. The texts of such changes as well as the copies of the Green Book on human rights and the Orders of the Higher Council of the Revolution had yet to be received by the Committee of Experts. They now understood from the Government's oral and written information that these Orders were no longer in force. In view of the fact that there was no verifiable information on the legal and practical situation in the country, they were obliged to assume that it remained unchanged and thus continued to be at variance with the provisions of the Convention. They felt that the Government should be urgently requested to clearly state in writing the laws it intended to amend and the time frame for these amendments.

The Government representative, referring to the absence of the texts of Acts Nos. 5 and 20 of 1991 as well as a copy of the Green Book, stated that his Government had sent copies of all of them to the ILO and failed to see any explanation for their disappearance. He disagreed that there were bureaucratic difficulties in his country which hindered the timely supply of reports on the application of Conventions. It was true that the various departments concerned would normally be consulted in the preparation of reports in response to the comments made by the Committee of Experts without giving rise to any particular problems. He reiterated that amendments to the Publications Act of 1972 and the relevant sections of the Penal Code would be introduced in conformity with Acts Nos. 5 and 20 of 1991.

The Committee noted the information provided by the Government, including the steps it seemed to have taken to amend the laws referred to by the Committee of Experts. It further noted that the Government attributed delays in reporting to the current political situation in and around the country. It recalled, however, that this question had been under discussion for several years during which period reports had not been sent on time. Under these circumstances, the Committee felt it was not in a position to discuss this matter in detail at this session. It therefore urged the Government to send detailed reports as soon as possible to enable this Committee to fully discuss the situation in a future session.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1991, Publication: 78th ILC session (1991)

A Government representative stated that this type of forced labour did not exist in his country and was prohibited by the law. It was true that the previous legislation did allow forced labour to be performed, but the People's Congress took steps to bring the legislation into line with the provisions of the Convention and with the Committee of Experts' comments.

The Workers' members observed that, in the absence of the report, the replies to the comments and of the relevant texts, the Committee of Experts had to repeat its observation concerning non-compliance with the Convention and in regard to imposing compulsory labour for expressing certain political views and for participation in strikes. They insisted that the Government should communicate the texts requested, such as the Green Paper to which the Government had referred to already, in 1990.

The Employers' members, noting that the case had been under discussion for a number of years, recalled the previous indications made by the Government concerning changes envisaged and its promises to communicate the necessary texts. They noted that no report had been received and no specific information communicated by the Government representative, and considered that there was no dialogue. They insistently requested that the Government should change all the provisions specifically referred to by the Committee of Experts, so that any forced labour related to the expression of political opinion should be eliminated, and considered that the conclusions should be particularly firm.

The Workers' member of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya referred to the positive changes which had taken place in his country, particularly since the General People's Congress adopted the Green Paper on Human Rights in June 1988. On its basis, all the legislation was being reviewed in order to ensure conformity with the Green Paper, the sole purpose of which is to guarantee a decent and egalitarian life for all citizens. The speaker indicated that the trade unions were following with close attention all the legislative work and were participating in the relevant committees. He expressed the hope that this work would be completed very shortly.

The Government representative pointed out that he noted all the comments and observations made. He stated that the Government would make serious efforts to communicate to the ILO all the reports and documents relating to this Convention.

The Committee took note of the explanations provided by the Government representative and of the report of the Committee of Experts. It regretted that no report had been received. The Committee recalled its conclusions of 1990, and earnestly hoped that the Government would take without delay all the measures that had been requested for some time, with a view to revising its legislation in order to bring it into conformity with the Convention. The Committee trusted that the Government would also be in a position to supply the information requested by the Experts on the application in practice of certain legal provisions. It expressed the firm hope that it would be in a position to note in the very near future real and substantial progress in the application of the Convention both in law and in practice.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1990, Publication: 77th ILC session (1990)

A Government representative indicated that a tripartite technical committee had examined the comments made by the Committee of Experts on the Convention and had recommended the amendment of certain legislation. This fact had been recognised in the Committee of Experts' report. Details concerning these amendments would be communicated to the Office as soon as they had been adopted.

The Employers' members referred to comments they had made in this Committee in 1987 to the effect that, at that time, the Government had expressed its readiness to amend the legislation appropriately so as to bring the law into confirmity with the Convention. The Publications Act of 1972 which provided for compulsory labour as a means of political education was not in conformity with the Convention. The Government had been examining this question for several years and it was now time that the matter be brought to its conclusion and the necessary amendments be made to the legislation. They urged the Government to take the necessary measures in this regard as soon as possible. Furthermore, the Committee of Experts'report referred to a number of legislative texts stipulating penalties for the expression of political opinion which had been in existence for some time but which had not yet been communicated to the Office. The Government should be urged to provide these texts for examination by the Committee of Experts as soon as possible and the necessary practical changes should be made.

The Workers' members supported the statement made by the Employers' members and added that, as there was no disagreement concerning the interpretation made by the Committee of Experts with regard to this Convention, the Government should be urged to resolve the problem in the very near future. As for the second point in the Committee of Experts' observation, it was once again a question of replying to, and sending, important legislative texts to the Committee of Experts for examination and comment.

The Government representative added that a "green paper" on human rights, covering all human rights Conventions including the present Convention had been communicated to the General Peoples' Congress and would be submitted to the Office. He reiterated that all texts which were to be amended in the future would be communicated to the Office as soon as they were adopted.

The Committee noted the explanations given by the Government representative indicating that the national tripartite committee had recommended various amendments to the legislation in order to bring it into full conformity with the Convention. The Committee welcomed such proposed amendments but, given that such action had been due for some time, it urged the Government to speed up the process of amendment. It hoped to be in a position to find the legislation appropriately amended in the near future and took note, in this respect, of the pledge of the Government representative to send copies of all texts as soon as they were available.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1987, Publication: 73rd ILC session (1987)

A representative of the Popular Administration, after stating that the comments of the Committee of Experts referred principally to certain penalties provided by the 1972 Publications Act, said that a tripartite committee had been established and had reached the same conclusions as the Committee of Experts. The Report of the tripartite committee would be submitted to the competent authorities in the very near future, and it contained a global and exhaustive examination of legal texts, with proposals for amending those aspects not in conformity with the Convention, on the lines of the comments made by the Committee of Experts. He announced their intention to respect commitments under international labour standards and to provide to the Office before the next session the text of the report of the tripartite committee together with further relevant information requested by the Committee of Experts.

The Workers' member noted the positive dialogue and the goodwill of the Government. The tripartite committee referred to be the Government representative had reached the same conclusion as the Committee of Experts, so it could be hoped that national law of practice would be brought into conformity with the Convention and that the Government could provide information in this respect to the next meeting of the Committee of Experts. They hoped that the next report would thus not only contain the conclusions of the above-mentioned tripartite committee, but also indicate follow-up action so that progress could then be noted in the application of this important Convention, both in legislation and in practice.

The Employer's members recalled that for a number of years the Penal Code and other laws had contained provisions which were not in conformity with the Convention on the abolition of forced labour. They welcomed the fact that the matters raised by the Committee of Experts had been examined and that the Government was willing to amend its legislation in order to obtain full conformity with the Convention. It was to be hoped that in the near future progress could be noted in the application of the Convention.

The representative of the Popular Administration thanked the Workers' and Employers' members for their statements, and said he hoped that in the next meeting of the present committee his country would be able to justify the confidence placed in it.

The Committee took note of the information provided by the Government representative and the measures proposed by the Government to bring its legislation into conformity with the Convention. The Committee expressed the hope that the Government would take the necessary action as soon as possible and provide full information on progress achieved.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report contains no reply to its previous comments. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

Repetition

Article 1(c) and (d) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or participation in strikes. For a number of years, the Committee has been referring to sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed on public servants or employees of public institutions as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or for participation in strikes, even in services the interruption of which would not endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in its report, that there is no information on the application of sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code in practice including as regards any prosecutions or penalties applied. The Committee recalls that Article 1 of the Convention prohibits any type of compulsory labour as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or for participating in strikes and requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code are not used to sanction by penalties involving compulsory labour (including compulsory prison labour) breaches of labour discipline or peaceful participation in a strike. Please provide information on any prosecution or sentence handed down under these provisions of the Penal Code, indicating the facts on which they are based.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report contains no reply to its previous comments. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments.

Repetition

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Publications Act No. 76, 1972 and the Penal Code. The Committee recalls that it has been referring for a number of years to various provisions of the Publications Act No. 76, 1972, under which persons who express certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system may be punished with penalties of imprisonment. These provisions – sections 28, 29, 37, 38 and 43 – concern restrictions on publication, printing and dissemination of information and provide for the imposition of penalties of imprisonment involving the obligation to work by virtue of sections 20, 21, 23 and 24(1) of the Penal Code. According to these provisions of the Penal Code, sentences of life imprisonment or imprisonment are defined as the confinement of a person in a place designated for the purpose and the infliction of compulsory labour, in accordance with the Prison Regulations. In cases of sentences of detention for a period of one year or more, the judge may order that the detention be with compulsory work.

Moreover, the Committee takes note of the following provisions of the Penal Code under which certain acts are punishable with imprisonment or life imprisonment, involving compulsory labour:

• section 175 providing for life imprisonment for anyone who intentionally circulates news, information or rumours that are false, biased or provocative propaganda in times of war and are such as to cause harm to the military preparations for defence of the country, [sow terror among the people] or to undermine the resilience of the nation;
• section 178 providing for life imprisonment for any Libyan abroad who disseminates or reports rumours or information which are false, exaggerated, or provoke concern about the internal condition of the Libyan Arab Republic;
• section 195, amended by Law No. 5 of 2014, making punishable by imprisonment “making any statements that insult the 17 February Revolution”;
• section 205 providing that anyone who publicly insults the Libyan nation, its national flag or State emblem, is liable to imprisonment;
• sections 206 and 207 providing that certain acts pertaining to unlawful organizations and formations and the promotion of any act against the system of the State are liable to penalties of death or life imprisonment;
• sections 220 and 221, providing that anyone who offends or insults the Government, the legislature, foreign Heads of State or accredited diplomatic representatives, is liable to imprisonment;
• sections 245 and 290, according to which anyone who insults a public official, judicial officer or judicial or administrative body or attacks, by any means of publicity, any religious faith, is liable to detention.

The Committee notes the Government’s reiteration, in its report, that it will take the necessary measures to: (1) bring the Publications Act No. 76, 1972, into conformity with the Convention; and (2) take the Committee’s comments into consideration to ensure that no penalty of imprisonment involving compulsory labour is imposed on persons who express political views or opinions opposed to the political system without resorting to violence.

The Committee notes that, according to the final report of the United Nations Fact-Finding Mission (FFM) on Libya of 3 March 2023, investigations underscored that Libyan authorities, notably the Internal Security Agency (a civil institution of the Libyan State with country-wide jurisdiction), are curtailing the rights to assembly, association, expression and belief to ensure obedience, entrench self-serving values and norms, and punish criticism against authorities and their leadership. Persons were detained for their criticism of the State and affiliated actors, and expression of divergent political, religious and social views and norms, including their opposition to patriarchy and sexism (A/HRC/52/83).

The Committee reiterates its deep concern at the current human rights situation in the country and recalls that restrictions on fundamental rights and liberties, including freedom of expression, have a bearing on the application of the Convention, if such measures are enforced by sanctions involving compulsory labour, as is the case in Libya when persons are convicted to a penalty of imprisonment or detention.

The Committee once again urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that no prison sentences involving compulsory labour are imposed on persons who, without having recourse to violence, express political opinions or views opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee hopes that, as reiterated by the Government in its report, it will take the necessary measures to bring the provisions of Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 into conformity with the Convention. Moreover, it requests the Government to provide specific information on the application in practice of the above-mentioned provisions of the Penal Code, including the number of cases prosecuted, convictions brought, the facts that led to these convictions, and penalties applied.

Anti-Cybercrime Law, 2022. The Committee notes that certain provisions of the Anti-Cybercrime Law of 2022 criminalize behaviours with a prison sentence, which involves compulsory labour. These include section 37 concerning the use of the internet or any other electronic means to propagate or publish information or data threatening public security or peace, in either the State of Libya or any other State. Sections 9 and 39 subject the use, as well as the production, manufacturing, distribution, and so forth, of encryption technologies or tools, to the consent of the National Information and Security and Safety Authority (NISSA) – an administrative and technical governmental authority – which is otherwise punishable with imprisonment. Under sections 4 and 7 of the Law, the use of the internet and “new technologies” is only legitimate and lawful as long as “public order and morality” are respected, and NISSA is permitted to monitor all content published on the internet and any other technical platform and block websites if they are deemed to provoke “racial or regional slurs and extremist religious or denominational ideologies that undermine the security and stability of society”.

The Committee notes that, in their communication of 31 March 2022, several United Nations experts expressed concern that the vague and broad nature of a number of the provisions of the Anti-Cybercrime Law would lead to their discriminate application against journalists, human rights defenders, activists and civil society actors who express dissenting views or publish, share or comment on information about the Government, its policies or actions, with such criticism being liable to interpretation as threatening to “public security or peace” or “public order or morality” (OL LBY 3/2022).

In this regard, the Committee notes, according to a press release of 25 March 2022 on the website of the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the concern expressed by the spokesperson for the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights regarding the deepening crackdown on civil society in Libya, where arbitrary arrests and a campaign of vilification are having a chilling effect on human rights defenders, humanitarian workers and other civil society actors. Seven men, aged between 19 and 29, were arbitrarily arrested and detained by the Internal Security Agency in 2021 and 2022, for using social media to propagate atheism and contempt for religion. According to the FFM report, four of these men were sentenced to three-year imprisonment “with hard labour” and fined by a domestic court in Tripoli (A/HRC/52/83).

The Committee notes this information with concern, as these restrictions on the right to freedom of expression may be penalized through sanctions of imprisonment involving compulsory labour. Therefore, the Committee urges the Government to take immediate measures, both in law and practice, to put an end to any violation of the Convention, by ensuring that no one who expresses political opinions, including dissenting opinions, or any views through the internet or any other technological tool, can be sentenced to imprisonment, under the terms of which compulsory labour is imposed. In this regard, the Committee expresses the hope that the Government will take measures to ensure that the provisions of the Anti-Cybercrime Law are amended in a way that will restrict their scope and prevent any interpretation in its application that could lead to the imposition of a penalty involving compulsory work on persons who express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system.

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

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

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

Article 1(c) and (d) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or participation in strikes. For a number of years, the Committee has been referring to sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed on public servants or employees of public institutions as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or for participation in strikes, even in services the interruption of which would not endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in its report, that there is no information on the application of sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code in practice including as regards any prosecutions or penalties applied. The Committee recalls that Article 1 of the Convention prohibits any type of compulsory labour as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or for participating in strikes and requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code are not used to sanction by penalties involving compulsory labour (including compulsory prison labour) breaches of labour discipline or peaceful participation in a strike. Please provide information on any prosecution or sentence handed down under these provisions of the Penal Code, indicating the facts on which they are based.

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

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system.The Publications Act No. 76, 1972 and the Penal Code. The Committee recalls that it has been referring for a number of years to various provisions of the Publications Act No. 76, 1972, under which persons who express certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system may be punished with penalties of imprisonment. These provisions – sections 28, 29, 37, 38 and 43 – concern restrictions on publication, printing and dissemination of information and provide for the imposition of penalties of imprisonment involving the obligation to work by virtue of sections 20, 21, 23 and 24(1) of the Penal Code. According to these provisions of the Penal Code, sentences of life imprisonment or imprisonment are defined as the confinement of a person in a place designated for the purpose and the infliction of compulsory labour, in accordance with the Prison Regulations. In cases of sentences of detention for a period of one year or more, the judge may order that the detention be with compulsory work.

Moreover, the Committee takes note of the following provisions of the Penal Code under which certain acts are punishable with imprisonment or life imprisonment, involving compulsory labour:

• section 175 providing for life imprisonment for anyone who intentionally circulates news, information or rumours that are false, biased or provocative propaganda in times of war and are such as to cause harm to the military preparations for defence of the country, [sow terror among the people] or to undermine the resilience of the nation;
• section 178 providing for life imprisonment for any Libyan abroad who disseminates or reports rumours or information which are false, exaggerated, or provoke concern about the internal condition of the Libyan Arab Republic;
• section 195, amended by Law No. 5 of 2014, making punishable by imprisonment “making any statements that insult the 17 February Revolution”;
• section 205 providing that anyone who publicly insults the Libyan nation, its national flag or State emblem, is liable to imprisonment;
• sections 206 and 207 providing that certain acts pertaining to unlawful organizations and formations and the promotion of any act against the system of the State are liable to penalties of death or life imprisonment;
• sections 220 and 221, providing that anyone who offends or insults the Government, the legislature, foreign Heads of State or accredited diplomatic representatives, is liable to imprisonment;
• sections 245 and 290, according to which anyone who insults a public official, judicial officer or judicial or administrative body or attacks, by any means of publicity, any religious faith, is liable to detention.

The Committee notes the Government’s reiteration, in its report, that it will take the necessary measures to: (1) bring the Publications Act No. 76, 1972, into conformity with the Convention; and (2) take the Committee’s comments into consideration to ensure that no penalty of imprisonment involving compulsory labour is imposed on persons who express political views or opinions opposed to the political system without resorting to violence.

The Committee notes that, according to the final report of the United Nations Fact-Finding Mission (FFM) on Libya of 3 March 2023, investigations underscored that Libyan authorities, notably the Internal Security Agency (a civil institution of the Libyan State with country-wide jurisdiction), are curtailing the rights to assembly, association, expression and belief to ensure obedience, entrench self-serving values and norms, and punish criticism against authorities and their leadership. Persons were detained for their criticism of the State and affiliated actors, and expression of divergent political, religious and social views and norms, including their opposition to patriarchy and sexism (A/HRC/52/83).

The Committee reiterates its deep concern at the current human rights situation in the country and recalls that restrictions on fundamental rights and liberties, including freedom of expression, have a bearing on the application of the Convention, if such measures are enforced by sanctions involving compulsory labour, as is the case in Libya when persons are convicted to a penalty of imprisonment or detention.

The Committee once again urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that no prison sentences involving compulsory labour are imposed on persons who, without having recourse to violence, express political opinions or views opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee hopes that, as reiterated by the Government in its report, it will take the necessary measures to bring the provisions of Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 into conformity with the Convention. Moreover, it requests the Government to provide specific information on the application in practice of the above-mentioned provisions of the Penal Code, including the number of cases prosecuted, convictions brought, the facts that led to these convictions, and penalties applied.

Anti-Cybercrime Law, 2022. The Committee notes that certain provisions of the Anti-Cybercrime Law of 2022 criminalize behaviours with a prison sentence, which involves compulsory labour. These include section 37 concerning the use of the internet or any other electronic means to propagate or publish information or data threatening public security or peace, in either the State of Libya or any other State. Sections 9 and 39 subject the use, as well as the production, manufacturing, distribution, and so forth, of encryption technologies or tools, to the consent of the National Information and Security and Safety Authority (NISSA) – an administrative and technical governmental authority – which is otherwise punishable with imprisonment. Under sections 4 and 7 of the Law, the use of the internet and “new technologies” is only legitimate and lawful as long as “public order and morality” are respected, and NISSA is permitted to monitor all content published on the internet and any other technical platform and block websites if they are deemed to provoke “racial or regional slurs and extremist religious or denominational ideologies that undermine the security and stability of society”.

The Committee notes that, in their communication of 31 March 2022, several United Nations experts expressed concern that the vague and broad nature of a number of the provisions of the Anti-Cybercrime Law would lead to their discriminate application against journalists, human rights defenders, activists and civil society actors who express dissenting views or publish, share or comment on information about the Government, its policies or actions, with such criticism being liable to interpretation as threatening to “public security or peace” or “public order or morality” (OL LBY 3/2022).

In this regard, the Committee notes, according to a press release of 25 March 2022 on the website of the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the concern expressed by the Spokesperson for the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights regarding the deepening crackdown on civil society in Libya, where arbitrary arrests and a campaign of vilification are having a chilling effect on human rights defenders, humanitarian workers and other civil society actors. Seven men, aged between 19 and 29, were arbitrarily arrested and detained by the Internal Security Agency in 2021 and 2022, for using social media to propagate atheism and contempt for religion. According to the FFM report, four of these men were sentenced to three-year imprisonment “with hard labour” and fined by a domestic court in Tripoli (A/HRC/52/83).

The Committee notes this information with concern, as these restrictions on the right to freedom of expression may be penalized through sanctions of imprisonment involving compulsory labour. Therefore, the Committee urges the Government to take immediate measures, both in law and practice, to put an end to any violation of the Convention, by ensuring that no one who expresses political opinions, including dissenting opinions, or any views through the internet or any other technological tool, can be sentenced to imprisonment, under the terms of which compulsory labour is imposed.In this regard, the Committee expresses the hope that the Government will take measures to ensure that the provisions of the Anti-Cybercrime Law are amended in a way that will restrict their scope and prevent any interpretation in its application that could lead to the imposition of a penalty involving compulsory work on persons who express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system.

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

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) and (d) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or participation in strikes. For a number of years, the Committee has been referring to sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed on public servants or employees of public institutions as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or for participation in strikes, even in services the interruption of which would not endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee also noted the Government’s indication that following the establishment of the revolutionary Transnational Council, laws that were not in conformity with the principles of freedom and democracy were suspended. Once the first Government was formed, ministerial sectors sought to draft new legislation including a trade unions act. These bills had not been promulgated yet because no national Constitution had been promulgated.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that forced labour is prohibited under section 37 of Labour Relations Act No. 12 of 2010, and that the use of forced labour in order to coerce, mobilize mass labour, to compel a person to work after the submission of a resignation; or as means of labour discipline or discrimination, is prohibited under section 39 of the implementing regulations for Act No. 12 of 2012.The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code in practice, including any prosecutions carried out or court decisions handed down, as well as the sanctions applied.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments.

Repetition

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. For a number of years, the Committee has been referring to various provisions of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972, under which persons expressing certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system may be punished with penalties of imprisonment (involving, under section 24(1) of the Penal Code, an obligation to perform labour). The Committee also noted the Government’s indication that the Publications Act would be amended to take into account the Committee’s comments. Moreover, following the establishment of the revolutionary Transnational Council, laws that were not in conformity with the principles of freedom and democracy were suspended, including the Publications Act. The Committee noted furthermore from the Report on the Investigation by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on Libya that journalists had faced serious harassment and death threats; some had been subjected to arbitrary detention and abduction. Journalists also faced criminal prosecution for defamation and libel for writing on political matters (2016 A/HRC/31/47, paragraph 50).

The Committee notes that in its report the Government refers to certain sections of the Publications Bill, indicating that the Bill is still being studied and amended and will be transmitted to the legislative authority as soon as it is completed. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the fact that the purpose of the Convention is to ensure that no form of compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, is used in the circumstances specified in the Convention. However, the Committee has observed that under various provisions of the abovementioned legislation, penalties of imprisonment involving compulsory labour may be imposed and are therefore not in line with the Convention.

Moreover, the Committee observes that according to the report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights of 2018, media professionals, activists and human rights defenders had their rights to freedom of expression and association restricted and were subjected to abductions, and arbitrary detention (A/HRC/37/46, paragraph 47). The Committee is therefore bound to express its deep concern at the current human rights situation in the country and recalls that restrictions on fundamental rights and liberties, including freedom of expression, may have a bearing on the application of the Convention, if such measures are enforced by sanctions involving compulsory labour.While acknowledging the difficult situation prevailing in the country, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that no prison sentences involving compulsory labour are imposed on persons who, without having recourse to violence, express political opinions or views opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee trusts that the necessary measures will be taken to bring the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 into conformity with the Convention, and requests the Government to provide information on the progress made in this regard.

The Committee invites the Government to avail itself of technical assistance from the Office in order to facilitate the implementation of the Convention.

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

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

Article 1(c) and (d) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or participation in strikes. For a number of years, the Committee has been referring to sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed on public servants or employees of public institutions as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or for participation in strikes, even in services the interruption of which would not endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee also noted the Government’s indication that following the establishment of the revolutionary Transnational Council, laws that were not in conformity with the principles of freedom and democracy were suspended. Once the first Government was formed, ministerial sectors sought to draft new legislation including a trade unions act. These bills had not been promulgated yet because no national Constitution had been promulgated.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that forced labour is prohibited under section 37 of Labour Relations Act No. 12 of 2010, and that the use of forced labour in order to coerce, mobilize mass labour, to compel a person to work after the submission of a resignation; or as means of labour discipline or discrimination, is prohibited under section 39 of the implementing regulations for Act No. 12 of 2012. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code in practice, including any prosecutions carried out or court decisions handed down, as well as the sanctions applied.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. For a number of years, the Committee has been referring to various provisions of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972, under which persons expressing certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system may be punished with penalties of imprisonment (involving, under section 24(1) of the Penal Code, an obligation to perform labour). The Committee also noted the Government’s indication that the Publications Act would be amended to take into account the Committee’s comments. Moreover, following the establishment of the revolutionary Transnational Council, laws that were not in conformity with the principles of freedom and democracy were suspended, including the Publications Act. The Committee noted furthermore from the Report on the Investigation by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on Libya that journalists had faced serious harassment and death threats; some had been subjected to arbitrary detention and abduction. Journalists also faced criminal prosecution for defamation and libel for writing on political matters (2016 A/HRC/31/47, paragraph 50).

The Committee notes that in its report the Government refers to certain sections of the Publications Bill, indicating that the Bill is still being studied and amended and will be transmitted to the legislative authority as soon as it is completed. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the fact that the purpose of the Convention is to ensure that no form of compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, is used in the circumstances specified in the Convention. However, the Committee has observed that under various provisions of the abovementioned legislation, penalties of imprisonment involving compulsory labour may be imposed and are therefore not in line with the Convention.

Moreover, the Committee observes that according to the report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights of 2018, media professionals, activists and human rights defenders had their rights to freedom of expression and association restricted and were subjected to abductions, and arbitrary detention (A/HRC/37/46, paragraph 47). The Committee is therefore bound to express its deep concern at the current human rights situation in the country and recalls that restrictions on fundamental rights and liberties, including freedom of expression, may have a bearing on the application of the Convention, if such measures are enforced by sanctions involving compulsory labour. While acknowledging the difficult situation prevailing in the country, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that no prison sentences involving compulsory labour are imposed on persons who, without having recourse to violence, express political opinions or views opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee trusts that the necessary measures will be taken to bring the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 into conformity with the Convention, and requests the Government to provide information on the progress made in this regard.

The Committee invites the Government to avail itself of technical assistance from the Office in order to facilitate the implementation of the Convention.

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

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

Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views, for breaches of labour discipline or participation in strikes. For a number of years, the Committee has been referring to various provisions of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972, under which persons expressing certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system may be punished with penalties of imprisonment (involving, under section 24(1) of the Penal Code, an obligation to perform labour). The Committee also referred to sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed on public servants or employees of public institutions as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or for participation in strikes, even in services the interruption of which would not endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee also noted the Government’s indication in its previous reports that the Publications Act would be amended to take into account the Committee’s comments.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that following the establishment of the revolutionary Transnational Council, laws that were not into conformity with the principles of freedom and democracy were suspended, including Publications Act. Once the first Government was formed, ministerial sectors sought to draft new legislation including, a trade unions act, a civil society organizations regulatory act and a press act. These bills have not been promulgated yet because no national Constitution has been promulgated. The Government also indicates that, once a permanent Constitution is promulgated, the bills will be submitted to the competent authority for promulgation.

The Committee notes furthermore from the Report on the Investigation by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on Libya of 15 February 2016 that journalists have faced serious harassment and death threats; some have been subjected to arbitrary detention, abduction and attempted assassination. Female journalists have also been targeted on the basis of their gender. The deaths of several journalists reported to OHCHR require further investigation. Media offices have been raided and attacked. Journalists also face criminal prosecution for defamation and libel for writing on political matters (A/HRC/31/47, paragraph 50).

The Committee must express its deep concern at the current human rights situation in the country and recalls that restrictions on fundamental rights and liberties, including freedom of expression, may have a bearing on the application of the Convention, if such measures are enforced by sanctions involving compulsory labour. While remaining aware of the complexity of the situation on the ground and the presence of armed groups and armed conflict in the country, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that no prison sentences involving compulsory labour are imposed on persons who, without having recourse to violence, express political opinions or views opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee trusts that the necessary measures will be taken to bring its legislation into conformity with the Convention, and requests the Government to provide information on the progress made with regards to the adoption of the new legislation.

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

Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. Sanctions for expressing political views, for breaches of labour discipline or participation in strikes. The Committee has been referring for many years to various provisions of the Publications Act of 1972, under which persons expressing certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system may be punished with penalties of imprisonment (involving, under section 24(1) of the Penal Code, an obligation to perform labour). The Committee also referred to sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed on public servants or employees of public institutions as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or for participation in strikes, even in services the interruption of which would not endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population.

The Committee also noted the Government’s indication in its previous reports that the abovementioned Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 would be amended and the Committee’s comments had been taken into account in the new draft Act under consideration. The Government also indicated that the draft amended Act had been submitted to the 2008 session of the Basic People’s Congresses.

The Committee notes however, an absence of information in the Government’s report as regards the abovementioned amendments. The Committee therefore hopes that the Government will provide in its next report any relevant information highlighting the progress made in this respect, and that in the framework of the amendment of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972, as well as the provisions of the Penal Code referred to above, it will ensure that no penalties involving compulsory labour may be imposed as a punishment on persons who have expressed certain political or ideological opinions or who have committed breaches of labour discipline or participated peacefully in strikes. The Committee asks the Government to supply copies of the amended texts, as soon as they are adopted, as well as copies of the legislative texts governing the establishment, functioning and dissolution of associations and political parties and hopes that the Government will not fail to supply such copies with its next report.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published th ILC session ()

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. Sanctions for expressing political views, for breaches of labour discipline or participation in strikes. Since many years, the Committee has been referring to various provisions of the Publications Act of 1972, under which persons expressing certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system may be punished with penalties of imprisonment (involving, under section 24(1) of the Penal Code, an obligation to perform labour). The Committee also referred to sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed on public servants or employees of public institutions as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or for participation in strikes, even in services the interruption of which would not endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the abovementioned Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 will be amended and the Committee’s comments have been taken into account in the draft new Act under consideration. The Government also indicates that the draft amended Act has been submitted to the 2008 session of the Basic People’s Congresses. The Committee notes, however, that no new information has been supplied as regards the amendment of sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code referred to above, though the Government has repeatedly expressed its intention to amend them in its earlier reports.

The Committee trusts that Publications Act No. 76 of 1972, as well as the provisions of the Penal Code referred to above, will be amended in the near future, in order to bring legislation into conformity with the Convention, so as to ensure that no penalties involving compulsory labour may be imposed as a punishment on persons who have expressed certain political or ideological opinions or who have committed breaches of labour discipline or participated in strikes. The Committee asks the Government to supply copies of the amended texts, as soon as they are adopted.

Supply of legislation. The Committee asks the Government once again to provide copies of the legislative texts governing the establishment, functioning and dissolution of associations and political parties and hopes that the Government will not fail to supply such copies with its next report.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. Sanctions for expressing political views, for breaches of labour discipline or participation in strikes. Since many years, the Committee has been referring to various provisions of the Publications Act of 1972, under which persons expressing certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system may be punished with penalties of imprisonment (involving, under section 24(1) of the Penal Code, an obligation to perform labour). The Committee also referred to sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed on public servants or employees of public institutions as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or for participation in strikes, even in services the interruption of which would not endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the abovementioned Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 will be amended and the Committee’s comments have been taken into account in the draft new Act under consideration. The Government also indicates that the draft amended Act has been submitted to the 2008 session of the Basic People’s Congresses. The Committee notes, however, that no new information has been supplied as regards the amendment of sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code referred to above, though the Government has repeatedly expressed its intention to amend them in its earlier reports.

The Committee trusts that Publications Act No. 76 of 1972, as well as the provisions of the Penal Code referred to above, will be amended in the near future, in order to bring legislation into conformity with the Convention, so as to ensure that no penalties involving compulsory labour may be imposed as a punishment on persons who have expressed certain political or ideological opinions or who have committed breaches of labour discipline or participated in strikes. The Committee asks the Government to supply copies of the amended texts, as soon as they are adopted.

Supply of legislation. The Committee asks the Government once again to provide copies of the legislative texts governing the establishment, functioning and dissolution of associations and political parties and hopes that the Government will not fail to supply such copies with its next report.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. Sanctions for expressing political views, for breaches of labour discipline or participation in strikes. Since many years, the Committee has been referring to various provisions of the Publications Act of 1972, under which persons expressing certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system may be punished with penalties of imprisonment (involving, under section 24(1) of the Penal Code, an obligation to perform labour). The Committee also referred to sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed on public servants or employees of public institutions as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or for participation in strikes, even in services, the interruption of which would not endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population.

In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that Act No. 20 of 1991 on the promotion of freedom proclaims the right of citizens to express their opinion and that point 2 of the Green Book on Human Rights prohibits punishments such as forced labour or long-term imprisonment. It also noted the Government’s indications to the effect that the abovementioned provisions of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 and of the Penal Code would be amended, and that under section 2 of Act No. 5 of 1991 on the application of the principles of the Green Book on Human Rights, amendments must be drawn up within a period of one year.

While noting the Government’s repeated confirmation of its intention to amend the provisions of Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 and the Penal Code referred to above, in accordance with the Convention and the provisions of Act No. 20 of 1991 on the promotion of freedom, the Committee expresses the firm hope that the necessary amendments will be made in the near future so as to ensure that no penalties involving compulsory labour may be imposed as a punishment on persons who have expressed certain political or ideological opinions or who have committed breaches of labour disciplines or participated in strikes. It asks the Government to supply the copies of the amended texts as soon as they are adopted.

Supply of legislation. The Committee asks the Government once again to provide copies of the legislative texts governing the establishment, functioning and dissolution of associations and political parties.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

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

1. Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. Over a number of years, the Committee has been referring to various provisions of Publications Act of 1972, under which persons expressing certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system may be punished with penalties of imprisonment (involving, under section 24(1) of the Penal Code, an obligation to perform labour). The Committee also referred to sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed on public servants or employees of public institutions as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or for participation in strikes, even in services the interruption of which would not endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population.

The Committee previously noted that Act No. 20 of 1991 on the promotion of freedom proclaims the right of citizens to express their opinion, and that point 2 of the Green Book on Human Rights prohibits punishments such as forced labour or long-term imprisonment. It also noted the Government’s indications to the effect that the abovementioned provisions of Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 and of the Penal Code would be amended, and that under section 2 of Act No. 5 of 1991 on the application of the principles of the Green Book on Human Rights, amendments must be drawn up within a period of one year.

In its reports received in 2000 and 2001, the Government reaffirms its intention to amend the provisions of Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 and the Penal Code referred to above, so as to ensure compliance with the Convention.

The Committee trusts that the necessary amendments will be made in the near future so as to ensure that no penalties involving compulsory labour may be imposed as a punishment on persons who have expressed certain political or ideological opinions or who have committed breaches of labour disciplines or participated in strikes, and that copies of the amendments will be forwarded to the ILO, as soon as they are adopted.

2. The Committee previously noted from the Government’s report that the Orders of the Higher Council of the Revolution of 1969, the texts of which it had been requesting, became null and void following the promulgation of Acts Nos. 5 and 20 of 1991. It also noted that section 35 of Act No. 20 of 1991 provides that all conflicting legislation has to be amended.

The Government reaffirms in its latest report that the Orders in question are no longer valid. The Committee reiterates its hope that the necessary measures will be taken to formally repeal these texts and that copies of the repealing texts will be communicated, as soon as they are adopted. It also once more expresses the hope that the legislative texts governing the establishment, functioning and dissolution of associations and political parties will be sent to the ILO.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

The Committee notes with regret that no report has been received from the Government. It must therefore repeat its previous observation on the following matters.

1. Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. In the comments it has been making for a number of years, the Committee has referred to various provisions of the Publications Act of 1972, under which persons expressing certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system may be punished with penalties of imprisonment (involving, under section 24(1) of the Penal Code, an obligation to perform labour). The Committee also referred to sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed on public servants or employees of public institutions as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or for participation in strikes, even in services the interruption of which would not endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. In its earlier comments the Committee noted the information supplied by the Government to the effect that Act No. 5 of 1991 on the application of the principles of the Green Book on Human Rights, and Act No. 20 of 1991 on the promotion of freedom, proclaim the right of each citizen to express his opinion, that Part 2 of the Green Book prohibits penalties such as forced labour, and that the provisions of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 and of the Penal Code would be amended. It also noted that under section 2 of Act No. 5 of 1991, amendments must be drawn up within a period of one year. In its latest report, received in 1995, the Government reaffirms its intention to amend the provisions of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972, and the Penal Code, referred to above, within the period of time prescribed in section 2 of Act No. 5, so as to ensure compliance with the Convention. The Committee hopes that the amendments will now be made and that they will ensure that no penalties involving compulsory labour may be imposed as a punishment on persons who have expressed certain political or ideological opinions or who have committed breaches of labour disciplines or participated in strikes. The Committee hopes that the Government will soon be in a position to supply a copy of the provisions adopted to this end. 2. In its earlier comments the Committee noted the information provided by the Government in 1992 in reply to its comments, to the effect that the Orders of the Higher Council of the Revolution of 1969, the texts of which it had been requesting, became null and void following the promulgation of Acts Nos. 5 and 20 of 1991. The Committee noted that the text of Act No. 5 of 1991 had not been included in the list of texts transmitted by the Government and that section 35 of Act No. 20 of 1991 provides in general terms that all conflicting legislation is amended. It also noted that the Orders in question on the defence of the revolution (of 11 December 1969) and on trials for political and administration corruption (of 26 October 1969) are explicitly referred to in section 5(A)(8) of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972. The Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken to formally repeal the texts in question and to transmit copies of the provisions adopted to this effect. In the absence of a reply, the Committee again expresses the hope that the Government will supply copies of the Orders of 1969 or of any provisions repealing them, as well as copies of Act No. 5 of 1991 of the Green Book on Human Rights and the legislative texts governing the establishment, functioning and dissolution of associations and political parties.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

1. Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. In the comments it has been making for a number of years, the Committee has referred to various provisions of the Publications Act of 1972, under which persons expressing certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system may be punished with penalties of imprisonment (involving, under section 24(1) of the Penal Code, an obligation to perform labour). The Committee also referred to sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed on public servants or employees of public institutions as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or for participation in strikes, even in services the interruption of which would not endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. In its earlier comments the Committee noted the information supplied by the Government to the effect that Act No. 5 of 1991 on the application of the principles of the Green Book on Human Rights, and Act No. 20 of 1991 on the promotion of freedom, proclaim the right of each citizen to express his opinion, that part 2 of the Green Book prohibits penalties such as forced labour, and that the provisions of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 and of the Penal Code would be amended. It also noted that under section 2 of Act No. 5 of 1991, amendments must be drawn up within a period of one year. In its latest report, received in 1995, the Government reaffirms its intention to amend the provisions of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972, and the penal Code, referred to above, within the period of time prescribed in section 2 of Act No. 5, so as to ensure compliance with the Convention. The Committee hopes that the amendments will now be made and that they will ensure that no penalties involving compulsory labour may be imposed as a punishment on persons who have expressed certain political or ideological opinions or who have committed breaches of labour disciplines or participated in strikes. The Committee hopes that the Government will soon be in a position to supply a copy of the provisions adopted to this end. 2. In its earlier comments the Committee noted the information provided by the Government in 1992 in reply to its comments, to the effect that the Orders of the Higher Council of the Revolution of 1969, the texts of which it had been requesting, became null and void following the promulgation of Acts Nos. 5 and 20 of 1991. The Committee noted that the text of Act No. 5 of 1991 had not been included in the list of texts transmitted by the Government and that section 35 of Act No. 20 of 1991 provides in general terms that all conflicting legislation is amended. It also noted that the Orders in question on the defence of the revolution (of 11 December 1969) and on trials for political and administration corruption (of 26 October 1969) are explicitly referred to in section 5(A)(8) of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972. The Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken to formally repeal the texts in question and to transmit copies of the provisions adopted to this effect. In the absence of a reply, the Committee again expresses the hope that the Government will supply copies of the Orders of 1969 or of any provisions repealing them, as well as copies of Act No. 5 of 1991 of the Green Book on Human Rights and the legislative texts governing the establishment, functioning and dissolution of associations and political parties.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

1. Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. In the comments it has been making for a number of years, the Committee has referred to various provisions of the Publications Act of 1972, under which persons expressing certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system may be punished with penalties of imprisonment (involving, under section 24(1) of the Penal Code, an obligation to perform labour). The Committee also referred to sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed on public servants or employees of public institutions as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or for participation in strikes, even in services the interruption of which would not endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. In its earlier comments the Committee noted the information supplied by the Government to the effect that Act No. 5 of 1991 on the application of the principles of the Green Book on Human Rights, and Act No. 20 of 1991 on the promotion of freedom, proclaim the right of each citizen to express his opinion, that part 2 of the Green Book prohibits penalties such as forced labour, and that the provisions of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 and of the Penal Code would be amended. It also noted that under section 2 of Act No. 5 of 1991, amendments must be drawn up within a period of one year. In its latest report, received in 1995, the Government reaffirms its intention to amend the provisions of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972, and the penal Code, referred to above, within the period of time prescribed in section 2 of Act No. 5, so as to ensure compliance with the Convention. The Committee hopes that the amendments will now be made and that they will ensure that no penalties involving compulsory labour may be imposed as a punishment on persons who have expressed certain political or ideological opinions or who have committed breaches of labour disciplines or participated in strikes. The Committee hopes that the Government will soon be in a position to supply a copy of the provisions adopted to this end. 2. In its earlier comments the Committee noted the information provided by the Government in 1992 in reply to its comments, to the effect that the Orders of the Higher Council of the Revolution of 1969, the texts of which it had been requesting, became null and void following the promulgation of Acts Nos. 5 and 20 of 1991. The Committee noted that the text of Act No. 5 of 1991 had not been included in the list of texts transmitted by the Government and that section 35 of Act No. 20 of 1991 provides in general terms that all conflicting legislation is amended. It also noted that the Orders in question on the defence of the revolution (of 11 December 1969) and on trials for political and administration corruption (of 26 October 1969) are explicitly referred to in section 5(A)(8) of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972. The Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken to formally repeal the texts in question and to transmit copies of the provisions adopted to this effect. In the absence of a reply, the Committee again expresses the hope that the Government will supply copies of the Orders of 1969 or of any provisions repealing them, as well as copies of Act No. 5 of 1991 of the Green Book on Human Rights and the legislative texts governing the establishment, functioning and dissolution of associations and political parties.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report.

1. Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. In the comments it has been making for a number of years, the Committee has referred to various provisions of the Publications Act of 1972, under which persons expressing certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system may be punished with penalties of imprisonment (involving, under section 24(1) of the Penal Code, an obligation to perform labour). The Committee also referred to sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed on public servants or employees of public institutions as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or for participation in strikes, even in services the interruption of which would not endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population.

In its earlier comments the Committee noted the information supplied by the Government to the effect that Act No. 5 of 1991 on the application of the principles of the Green Book on Human Rights, and Act No. 20 of 1991 on the promotion of freedom, proclaim the right of each citizen to express his opinion, that part 2 of the Green Book prohibits penalties such as forced labour, and that the provisions of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 and of the Penal Code would be amended. It also noted that under section 2 of Act No. 5 of 1991, amendments must be drawn up within a period of one year.

In its latest report, received in 1995, the Government reaffirms its intention to amend the provisions of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972, and the penal Code, referred to above, within the period of time prescribed in section 2 of Act No. 5, so as to ensure compliance with the Convention.

The Committee hopes that the amendments will now be made and that they will ensure that no penalties involving compulsory labour may be imposed as a punishment on persons who have expressed certain political or ideological opinions or who have committed breaches of labour disciplines or participated in strikes.

The Committee hopes that the Government will soon be in a position to supply a copy of the provisions adopted to this end.

2. In its earlier comments the Committee noted the information provided by the Government in 1992 in reply to its comments, to the effect that the Orders of the Higher Council of the Revolution of 1969, the texts of which it had been requesting, became null and void following the promulgation of Acts Nos. 5 and 20 of 1991.

The Committee noted that the text of Act No. 5 of 1991 had not been included in the list of texts transmitted by the Government and that section 35 of Act No. 20 of 1991 provides in general terms that all conflicting legislation is amended. It also noted that the Orders in question on the defence of the revolution (of 11 December 1969) and on trials for political and administration corruption (of 26 October 1969) are explicitly referred to in section 5(A)(8) of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972. The Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken to formally repeal the texts in question and to transmit copies of the provisions adopted to this effect.

In the absence of a reply, the Committee again expresses the hope that the Government will supply copies of the Orders of 1969 or of any provisions repealing them, as well as copies of Act No. 5 of 1991 of the Green Book on Human Rights and the legislative texts governing the establishment, functioning and dissolution of associations and political parties.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

The Committee notes that no report has been received from the Government. It must, therefore, repeat its previous observation on the following points:

1. Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. In the comments it has been making for a number of years, the Committee has referred to various provisions of the Publications Act of 1972, under which persons expressing certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system may be punished with penalties of imprisonment (involving, under section 24(1) of the Penal Code, an obligation to perform labour). The Committee also referred to sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed on public servants or employees of public institutions as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or for participation in strikes, even in services the interruption of which would not endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee has noted the information supplied by the Government to the effect that Act No. 5 of 1991 on the application of the principles of the Green Book on Human Rights, and Act No. 20 of 1991 on the promotion of freedom, proclaim the right of each citizen to express his opinion, and that part 2 of the Green Book prohibits penalties such as forced labour. It also notes that under section 2 of Act No. 5 of 1991, amendments must be drawn up within a period of one year and that the provisions of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 and of the Penal Code will be amended. The Committee hopes that the envisaged amendments will provide for the exemption from compulsory labour imposed as a punishment or means of coercion or political education on persons who have expressed certain political or ideological opinions and that they will abolish forced or compulsory labour as a measure of labour discipline. The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the work that has been undertaken to amend the legislation and to transmit the relevant texts. 2. The Committee has noted the information provided by the Government in 1992 in reply to its comments, to the effect that the Orders of the Higher Council of the Revolution of 1969, the texts of which it had been requesting, became null and void following the promulgation of Acts Nos. 5 and 20 of 1991. The Committee notes that section 35 of Act No. 20 of 1991 provides in general terms that all conflicting legislation is amended. It also notes that the Orders in question on the defence of the revolution (of 11 December 1969) and on trials for political and administrative corruption (of 26 October 1969) are explicitly referred to in section 5(A)(8) of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures that have been taken to formally repeal the texts in question and to transmit the provisions adopted to this effect. The Committee notes that the text of Act No. 5 of 1991 was not included in the list of texts transmitted by the Government. It requests the Government to supply the text of this Act and of all other texts referred to above, and particularly the Green Book on Human Rights and the legislative texts concerning the establishment, functioning and dissolution of associations and political parties.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

The Committee notes the Government's report dated 28 May 1992 and the information supplied by the Government to the Conference Committee in June 1992.

1. Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. In the comments it has been making for a number of years, the Committee has referred to various provisions of the Publications Act of 1972, under which persons expressing certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system may be punished with penalties of imprisonment (involving, under section 24(1) of the Penal Code, an obligation to perform labour). The Committee also referred to sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, under which penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed on public servants or employees of public institutions as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or for participation in strikes, even in services the interruption of which would not endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population.

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government to the effect that Act No. 5 of 1991 on the application of the principles of the Green Book on Human Rights, and Act No. 20 of 1991 on the promotion of freedom, proclaim the right of each citizen to express his opinion, and that part 2 of the Green Book prohibits penalties such as forced labour. It also notes that under section 2 of Act No. 5 of 1991, amendments must be drawn up within a period of one year and that the provisions of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972 and of the Penal Code will be amended.

The Committee hopes that the envisaged amendments will provide for the exemption from compulsory labour imposed as a punishment or means of coercion or political education on persons who have expressed certain political or ideological opinions and that they will abolish forced or compulsory labour as a measure of labour discipline.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the work that has been undertaken to amend the legislation and to transmit the relevant texts.

2. The Committee notes the indications provided by the Government, in reply to its comments, to the effect that the Orders of the Higher Council of the Revolution of 1969, the texts of which it had been requesting, became null and void following the promulgation of Acts Nos. 5 and 20 of 1991.

The Committee notes that section 35 of Act No. 20 of 1991 provides in general terms that all conflicting legislation is amended. It also notes that the Orders in question on the defence of the revolution (of 11 December 1969) and on trials for political and administrative corruption (of 26 October 1969) are explicitly referred to in section 5(A)(8) of the Publications Act No. 76 of 1972. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures that have been taken to formally repeal the texts in question and to transmit the provisions adopted to this effect.

The Committee notes that the text of Act No. 5 of 1991 was not included in the list of texts transmitted by the Government. It requests the Government to supply the text of this Act and of all other texts referred to above, and particularly the Green Book on Human Rights and the legislative texts concerning the establishment, functioning and dissolution of associations and political parties.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

The Committee notes the Government's report and the discussions that took place at the Conference Committee in 1991.

1. Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. In comments it has been making for a number of years, the Committee has referred to various provisions of the Publications Act of 1972, under which persons expressing certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system may be punished with penalties of imprisonment (involving, under section 24(1) of the Penal Code, an obligation to perform labour). The Committee also referred to sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, under which penalties of imprisonment involving compulsory labour may be imposed on public servants or employees of public institutions as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or for participation in strikes even in services the interruption of which would not endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population.

The Committee has pointed out in paragraphs 102 to 109 of its General Survey of 1979 on the Abolition of Forced Labour that the Convention does not prohibit the exaction from common offenders of compulsory labour intended to reform or rehabilitate them. The Committee has stressed, however, that this same need does not arise in the case of persons protected by the Convention: in the case of persons punished for having expressed certain political views, an intention to reform or educate them through labour would in itself be covered by the express terms of the Convention, which applies, inter alia, to any form of compulsory labour as a means of political education.

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government and, in particular, the reports of the national committee responsible for examining international labour Conventions and Recommendations. According to these reports, although the national committee is not convinced of the need to abolish the obligation to work which, in its opinion, enables prisoners to be reintegrated into the labour market and does not constitute labour, it recommends that the legislation be amended to provide that prisoners may work if they so wish.

The Committee notes that the Government already mentioned a similar reform of the legislation in its report received in 1988, and hopes that the Government will shortly provide information on the legislative amendments adopted to ensure that effect is given to the Convention in this respect.

2. The Committee hopes that the Government will provide copies of the following texts referred to previously: the Green Paper on human rights, the Orders of the Higher Council of the Revolution of 11 December 1969 respecting the defence of the revolution and of 26 October 1969 respecting the judgement of those responsible for political and administrative corruption, which are referred to in section 5(A)(8) of the Publications Act; all legislative texts concerning the establishment, operation and disbanding of associations and political parties.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government's report has not been received. The Committee has, however, taken note of the discussion which took place in the Conference Committee in 1990. The Committee notes that in its statement to the Conference Committee a Government representative indicated that a "green paper" on human rights covering all human rights Conventions had been communicated to the General Peoples' Congress and would be submitted to the Office, as well as all texts which were to be amended in the future.

The Committee expresses the hope that the Government will communicate the afore-mentioned documents and provide full information on the following matters raised in its previous observation:

1. Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. In comments made for a number of years, the Committee has referred to various provisions of the Publications Act of 1972, under which persons expressing certain political views, or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system may be punished with penalties of imprisonment (involving, under section 24(1) of the Penal Code, an obligation to perform labour). The Committee has likewise referred to sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, under which penalties of imprisonment involving compulsory labour may be imposed on public servants or employees of public institutions as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or for participation in strikes even in services whose interruption would not endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee has asked the Government to indicate the measures taken to bring these provisions into conformity with the Convention. It also has asked for information on the practical application of a number of other provisions of the Penal Code, in order the ascertain the observance of the Convention.

The Committee noted with interest from the Government's report received in 1988 that the tripartite Committee established at the national level to examine its comments, although of the opinion that the work performed by prisoners permitted the learning of a trade which might be useful upon release from prison, nevertheless had recognised obligations under the Convention and had recommended, therefore, that national legislation be harmonised with the Convention so as to assure the freedom of prisoners with regard to work.

The Committee has pointed out in paragraphs 102 to 109 of its 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour that the Convention does not prohibit the exaction from common offenders of compulsory labour intended to reform or rehabilitate them, but protects a limited range of persons where the same need does not arise. In the case of persons punished for expressing certain political views an intention to reform or educate them through labour would, in itself, be covered by the express terms of the Convention, which applies, inter alia, to any form of compulsory labour as a means of political education. In many countries, the law has traditionally accorded to prisoners convicted of certain political offences a special status under which they are free from prison labour imposed on common offenders, although they may work on request. The Committee hopes that the Government will provide information on any legislative amendments adopted to ensure the observance of Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention with regard to persons convicted under the relevant provisions of the Publications Act and the Penal Code. Pending amendment of the legislation, the Committee requests the Government to supply information on the practical application (including court decisions defining their scope) of sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, as well as sections 175, 195, 206, 207, 220, 221, 245 and 291 of the same Code.

2. Supply of legislative texts. For a number of years the Committee has asked the Government (a) to furnish the text of the Orders of the Higher Council of the Revolution of 11 December 1969 respecting the defence of the revolution and of 26 October 1969 respecting the judgement of those responsible for political and administrative corruption, which are referred to in section 5(A)(8) of the Publications Act; and (b) to furnish all legislative texts concerning the establishment, operation and dissolution of associations and political parties. The Committee hopes that these texts will soon be supplied, so as to enable it to ascertain the observance of the Convention.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

The Committee notes that no report has been received from the Government. It must therefore repeat its previous observation on the following matters:

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report received in 1988 and in its statement to the Conference Committee in 1987, as well as the discussion which took place in the Conference Committee. 1. Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. In comments made for a number of years, the Committee has referred to various provisions of the Publications Act of 1972, under which persons expressing certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system may be punished with penalties of imprisonment (involving, under section 24(1) of the Penal Code, an obligation to perform labour). The Committee has likewise referred to sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, under which penalties of imprisonment involving compulsory labour may be imposed on public servants or employees of public institutions as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline or for participation in strikes even in services whose interruption would not endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee has asked the Government to indicate the measures taken to bring these provisions into conformity with the Convention. It also has asked for information on the practical application of a number or other provisions of the Penal Code, in order to ascertain the observance of the Convention. The Committee noted with interest from the Government's report received in 1988 that the tripartite Committee established at the national level to examine its comments, although of the opinion that the work performed by prisoners permitted the learning of a trade which might be useful upon release from prison, nevertheless has recognised obligations under the Convention and has recommended, therefore, that national legislation be harmonised with the Convention so as to assure the freedom of prisoners with regard to work. The Committee has pointed out in paragraphs 102 to 109 of its 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour that the Convention does not prohibit the exaction from common offenders of compulsory labour intended to reform or rehabilitate them, but protects a limited range of persons where the same need does not arise. In the case of persons punished for expressing certain political views an intention to reform or educate them through labour would in itself be covered by the express terms of the Convention, which applies, inter alia, to any form of compulsory labour as a means of political education. In many countries, the law has traditionally accorded to prisoners convicted of certain political offences a special status under which they are free from prison labour imposed on common offenders, although they may work on request. The Committee offenders, although they may work on request. The Committee looks forward to learning of the legislative amendments announced by the Government to ensure the observance of Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention with regard to persons convicted under the relevant provisions of the Publications Act and the Penal Code. Pending amendment of the legislation, the Committee requests the Government to supply information on the practical application (including court decisions defining their scope)of sections 237 and 238 of the Penal Code, as well as sections 175, 195,206, 207, 220, 221, 245 and 291 of the same code. 2. Supply of legislative texts. For a number of years the Committee has asked the Government (a) to furnish the text of the Orders of the Higher Council of the Revolution of 11 December 1969 respecting the defense of the revolution and of 26 October 1969 respecting the judgement of those responsible for political and administrative corruption, which are referred to in section 5(A)(8) of the Publications Act; and (b) to furnish all legislative texts concerning the establishment, operation and dissolution of associations and political parties.

TEXT

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.