Observación (CEACR) - Adopción: 2012, Publicación: 102ª reunión CIT (2013)

Convenio sobre la abolición del trabajo forzoso, 1957 (núm. 105) - Filipinas (Ratificación : 1960)

Otros comentarios sobre C105

Observación

Solicitud directa

Visualizar en: Francés - EspañolVisualizar todo

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee previously noted that, pursuant to section 142 of the Revised Penal Code, penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) may be imposed for inciting to sedition by means of speeches, proclamations, writings or emblems; uttering seditious words or speeches; writing, publishing or circulating scurrilous libels against the Government, and pursuant to section 154, for publishing any false news which may endanger the public order or cause damage to the interest or credit of the State, by means of printing, lithography or any other means of publication. The Committee observed that these provisions of the Revised Penal Code are worded in terms broad enough to lend themselves to be applied as a means of punishment for the peaceful expression of views and, in so far as they are enforceable with sanctions involving compulsory labour, they fall within the scope of the Convention. The Committee expressed the hope that measures would be taken to amend or repeal sections 142 and 154 of the Revised Penal Code so as to bring legislation into conformity with the Convention.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement that a committee composed of experts in criminal law is in the process of studying the amendment to the Revised Penal Code. Recalling that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that sections 142 and 154 of the Revised Penal Code are amended or repealed so as to ensure that no prison sentence entailing compulsory labour can be imposed on persons who, without using or advocating violence, express certain political views or opposition to the established political, social or economic system. It requests the Government to provide information on measures taken in this regard with its next report. Pending the amendment of the Revised Penal Code, the Committee again requests the Government to provide information on the application of sections 142 and 154 in practice, including copies of relevant court decisions defining or illustrating the scope of these provisions.

Article 1(d). Punishment for having participated in strikes. The Committee previously noted that pursuant to section 263(g) of the Labor Code, the Secretary of Labor and Employment has discretionary authority to enjoin or force an end to strikes in labour disputes that occur in industries which, in his or her opinion, are “indispensable to the national interest”, by “assuming jurisdiction” over the dispute and certifying it for compulsory arbitration. Section 263(g) also provides that the President may determine the industries “indispensable to the national interest” and assume jurisdiction over a labour dispute. The declaration of a strike after such “assumption of jurisdiction” or submission to compulsory arbitration is prohibited (section 264), and participation in an illegal strike is punishable by imprisonment (section 272(a) of the Labor Code), which involves an obligation to perform labour (pursuant to section 1727 of the Revised Administrative Code). The Revised Penal Code also provides for sanctions of imprisonment for participation in illegal strikes (section 146).

The Committee notes the statement in a report from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) entitled “Internationally recognized core labour standards in Philippines: Report for the WTO General Council Review of the Trade Policies of Philippines” of 20 and 22 March 2012 that in 2010, the Department of Labor and Employment assumed jurisdiction in seven disputes. The ITUC report also indicates that severe penalties are applied for participation in illegal strikes, including up to three years of imprisonment.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement that one of the priorities of the Philippine Labor and Employment Plan 2011–15 is responding to labour market realities through policy reforms and aligning labour legislation with the Philippine Constitution, international treaties and ILO Conventions, in a sound and realistic manner. The Department of Labor and Employment is initiating the review of labour legislation through the Labor Code Review Project, on a tripartite basis and under the auspices of the Joint Congressional Committee on Labor and Employment. This Labor Code Review Project will create a tripartite commission on labour law reform composed of representatives from the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council (NTIPC) and national and international experts on labour law and social legislation. The Government indicates that through consultations with tripartite support, these reforms will include the amendment of sections 263, 264 and 272 of the Labor Code. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report submitted under the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), that two bills are undergoing tripartite consultations for submission to the NTIPC, one of which removes the possibility of imposing a criminal sanction for mere participation in an illegal strike on grounds of non-compliance with the administrative requirements.

The Committee recalls that Article 1(d) of the Convention prohibits the use of any form of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for having participated in strikes. It refers in this connection to the explanations contained in paragraph 315 of its 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions concerning rights at work, in which it has considered that, regardless of the legality of the strike action, any sanctions imposed should not be disproportionate to the seriousness of the violations committed, and the authorities should not have recourse to measures of imprisonment for the mere fact of organizing or participating in a strike. Referring also to its comments addressed to the Government under Convention No. 87, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures, within the framework of the Labor Code Review Project, to amend the Labor Code so as to ensure that penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) cannot be imposed for participation in a strike. It requests the Government to provide information on measures taken in this regard in its next report.

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