Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2005, Publicación: 95ª reunión CIT (2006)

The Committee notes the Government’s report, including the Independent Media Commission Act, No. 148 of 1993, annexed to the report, and requests the Government to supply copies of more general provisions governing the press and other media, as well as public assemblies, meetings and demonstrations, so that the Committee could ascertain their conformity with the Convention.

Article 1(c) and (d) of the Convention. Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. The Committee previously noted that penalties of imprisonment (involving an obligation to perform labour, under section 37(1)(b) of the Correctional Services Act, 1998) may be imposed on a seafarer under the following provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1951, as amended:

-         under section 174(2)(c), read in conjunction with section 313(2), if a seafarer is guilty of continued wilful disobedience to lawful commands or continued wilful neglect of duty;

-         under section 174(2)(d), read in conjunction with section 313(2), if a seafarer combines with any of the crew to disobey lawful commands, or to neglect duty, or to impede the navigation of the ship or retard the progress of the voyage.

Sections 321 and 180(2)(b) of the Merchant Shipping Act provide for the forcible conveyance of seafarers on board ship to perform their duties.

The Committee pointed out, referring to the explanations in paragraphs 117 to 119 and 125 of its General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour, that only sanctions relating to acts that are likely to endanger the safety of the ship or the life or health of persons do not come within the scope of the Convention. The Committee observed that the provisions of section 174(2)(c) and (d) are not limited to acts or omissions leading to the immediate loss, destruction or serious damage of the ship, or endangering the life of or causing injury to persons on board, as is section 174(1), which does not come under the purview of the Convention. On the contrary, section 174(2)(c) and (d) provides for the imposition of sanctions involving compulsory labour as a means of labour discipline (and possibly as a punishment for having participated in strikes) and is thus incompatible with Article 1(c) (and, in so far as applicable in case of strikes, to Article 1(d)) of the Convention.

As regards the provisions of sections 321 and 180(2)(b) concerning forcible conveyance of seafarers on board ship to perform their duties, the Committee pointed out, referring to paragraph 110 of its General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour, that measures to ensure the due performance by a worker of his service under compulsion of law (in the form of physical constraint or the menace of a penalty) constitute forced or compulsory labour as a means of labour discipline and are thus incompatible with the Convention.

The Committee notes the Government’s brief indication in the report that this matter has been brought before the relevant bodies for examination and recommendation and reiterates its hope that the necessary measures will be taken to bring the above provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act into conformity with the Convention. It requests the Government to supply, in its next report, information on the progress made in this regard.