Observation (CEACR) - adoptée 2010, publiée 100ème session CIT (2011)

The Committee notes the Government’s communication of 25 January 2010 in reply to the 2009 communication of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE), and the Government’s reports dated 3 February 2010 and 7 June 2010. The Committee also notes the communication of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) dated 25 August 2010. The Committee further notes the joint communication dated 22 November 2010 from the ITUC, the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), the European Trade Union Federation: Textiles, Clothing and Leather (ETUF:TCL), the International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers’ Association (IUF) and the European Federation of Food, Agriculture and Tourism Trade Unions (EFFAT), as well as the joint communication dated 22 November 2010 from the European Apparel and Textile Confederation (EURATEX) and the ETUF:TCL. The Committee finally takes note of the detailed discussions that took place at the 99th Session of the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in June 2010 concerning the application by Uzbekistan of Convention No. 182.

Article 3, clauses (a) and (d), and Article 7(1) of the Convention. Worst forms of child labour and penalties. Forced or compulsory labour in cotton production and hazardous work. The Committee previously noted the various legal provisions in Uzbekistan which prohibit forced labour, including article 37 of the Constitution, section 7 of the Labour Code, and section 138 of the Criminal Code. It also noted that section 241 of the Labour Code prohibits the employment of persons under 18 years of age in work in unfavourable conditions or which may harm their health, safety or morals. The Committee further noted that the “List of occupations with unfavourable working conditions in which it is forbidden to employ persons under 18 years of age” prohibited children from watering and gathering cotton by hand and noted the IOE’s indication that the Uzbek Prime Minister signed a decree banning child labour in cotton plantations in Uzbekistan in September 2008. However, the Committee also noted the IOE’s assertion that, despite the legislative framework against forced labour, schoolchildren (estimates ranging from half a million to 1.5 million schoolchildren) are forced by the Government to work in the national cotton harvest for up to three months each year. Moreover, the Committee noted that the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights expressed its concern at the situation of school-age children obliged to participate in the cotton harvest instead of attending school during this period (24 January 2006, E/C.12/UZB/CO/1, paragraph 20), and that the Committee on the Rights of the Child expressed concern at the serious health problems (such as intestinal and respiratory infections, meningitis and hepatitis) experienced by many schoolchildren as a result of this participation (2 June 2006, CRC/C/UZB/CO/2, paragraphs 64–65).

The Committee notes the statement in the ITUC’s allegations that state-sponsored forced child labour continues to underpin Uzbekistan’s cotton industry. The ITUC contends that a vast disparity exists between legal commitments made to eradicate forced child labour and the practical implementation, as seen in the forcible involvement of hundreds of thousands of schoolchildren in the autumn 2009 harvest. In this regard, the ITUC asserts that, despite the Government’s denial, sources in the country confirm the widespread mobilization of forced labour (particularly of children) in the 2009 cotton harvest in at least 12 of Uzbekistan’s 13 regions: Andijan, Bukhara, Jizzakh, Ferghana, Karakalpakstan, Kaskadrya, Khoresm, Navoi, Samarkland, Syrdarya, Surkhandarya and Tashkent. The ITUC communication emphasizes that this involvement is not the result of family poverty, but state-sponsored mobilization which benefits the Government. The ITUC further states that production quotas (originating from the central Government and distributed through district education departments) are supplied to head teachers who then mobilize students, and that this forced labour involves children as young as 9 years old (though the majority of schoolchildren involved are 11 years or older). The ITUC alleges that these children are required to work every day, even on weekends, and that the work involved is hazardous, involving carrying heavy loads, the application of pesticides and harsh weather conditions, with accidents reportedly resulting in injuries and deaths. These children are provided with insufficient drinking water, and often resort to drinking water contaminated with pesticides out of the irrigation system. Moreover, the ITUC underlines that, although forced labour was again part of the harvest in 2010, there was an increase in surveillance operatives in cotton fields to prevent documentation of the issue, and that accurate figures on the issue are impossible to obtain. The ITUC recommends that the Government take urgent action, including measures to publicly renounce the use of forced child labour in the cotton industry, to commit all necessary resources to address this phenomenon, to improve ethical and technical standards in the cotton industry and to strengthen social dialogue in the country.

The Committee notes the Government’s reply to the IOE’s communication which states that the allegations concerning widespread forced labour in agriculture are an unfounded attempt by foreign actors to undermine the reputation of Uzbek cotton in the global market. The Government states that almost all of the cotton produced in the country is produced on private cotton farms, and that the well-developed education system is an obstacle to the employment of children in forced labour. The Government further indicates that it is traditional for older children to assist in family businesses, and that this practice is not prohibited. With regard to penalties, the Government states that on 21 December 2009 the Act on additions and amendments to the Uzbekistan Code of Administrative Liability was adopted which increased the penalty for violations of labour legislation and compulsory labour of persons under 18 years of age.

The Committee notes the statement in the UNICEF publication entitled “Risks and Realities of Child Trafficking and Exploitation in Central Asia” of 31 March 2010 that the issue of seasonal mobilization of children for the cotton harvest in Uzbekistan is a growing concern internationally and at home (page 49). The Committee also notes that the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, in its concluding observations of 26 January 2010, expressed its concern regarding the educational consequences of girls and boys working during the cotton harvest season, and requested the Government to guarantee that the cotton harvest season does not compromise the right of these children to education (CEDAW/C/UZB/CO/4, paragraphs 30–31). Moreover, the Committee notes that the UN Human Rights Committee, in its concluding observations of 7 April 2010, stated that it remained concerned about reports that children are still employed and subjected to harsh working conditions, in particular for cotton harvesting. The UN Human Rights Committee emphasized that the Government should ensure that its national legislation and international obligations regulating child labour are fully respected in practice (CCPR/C/UZB/CO/3, paragraph 23).

Furthermore, the Committee notes that the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards concluded that, although various legal provisions prohibit forced labour and the engagement of children in hazardous work, this remains an issue of grave concern in practice. It accordingly urged the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure the effective implementation of national legislation prohibiting compulsory labour and hazardous work for children.

The Committee notes the convergence of allegations and the broad consensus among the United Nations bodies, the representative organizations of employers and workers and NGOs, regarding the continued practice of mobilizing schoolchildren for work in the cotton harvest. The Committee must therefore echo the serious concern expressed by these bodies at the continued practice whereby a significant number of children under 18 are taken from school each year and made to work in the cottons fields under hazardous conditions. In this regard, the Committee recalls that, by virtue of Article 3(a) and (d) of the Convention, forced labour and hazardous work are considered as worst forms of child labour and that, by virtue of Article 1 of the Convention, member States are required to take immediate and effective measures to secure the elimination of the worst forms of child labour, as a matter of urgency. Furthermore, the Committee recalls that, by virtue of Article 7(1), of the Convention, ratifying countries are required to ensure the effective implementation and enforcement of the provisions giving effect to the Convention, including through the provision and application of penal sanctions. The Committee joins the Committee on the Application of Standards in urging the Government to take immediate and effective time-bound measures to eradicate the forced labour of, or hazardous work by, children under 18 years in cotton production, as a matter of urgency. In this regard, it requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that thorough investigations and robust prosecutions of offenders are carried out and that sufficiently effective and dissuasive sanctions are imposed in practice.

Articles 5 and 6. Monitoring mechanisms and programmes of action to eliminate the worst forms of child labour. National Plan of Action for the application of ILO Conventions Nos 138 and 182 (NPA on Convention No. 138 and Convention No. 182). The Committee previously noted that the NPA on Convention No. 138 and Convention No. 182 (approved in 2008) included measures to address the forced labour of children, in particular in the agricultural sector, including: monitoring of the prohibition of the use of school pupils in forced labour; public control of the prohibition of the use of forced child labour in territories of self-governing bodies of citizens; the establishment of a working group to locally monitor the prohibition of the use of forced labour in cotton picking of school pupils; and initiatives to inform farmers on matters related to the prohibition of violating legislation on the engagement of children in agricultural work. However, the Committee also noted the IOE’s allegation that it remained uncertain as to whether the implementation of these adopted measures would be sufficient to address the deeply rooted practice of forced child labour in the cotton fields.

The Committee notes the ITUC’s statement that the NPA on Convention No. 138 and Convention No. 182 requires improvement. For the NPA on Convention No. 138 and Convention No. 182 to be credible and effective, forced child labour needs to be eradicated, and the monitoring of this phenomenon must be completely independent. The ITUC recommends that a comprehensive national action plan which recognizes and addresses the root causes of this practice must be put in place.

The Committee notes the detailed report submitted by the Government dated 3 February 2010 on the implementation of the NPA on Convention No. 138 and Convention No. 182. The Government indicates in this report that on 3 November 2009, the Ministry of Public Education and the Ministry of Higher and Secondary Special Education adopted and implemented a joint resolution on “Measures to apply the Minimum Age Convention and the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention in the education system” (No.1-04/340, No. 43 and No. 322). Pursuant to this resolution, heads of educational institutions have personal responsibility for the protection of students and their attendance at school and that monitoring will be carried out concerning the prohibited use of compulsory labour of students in schools. The Committee also notes that, by February 2010, information seminars were held in 11 provinces to explain the prohibition on employing children in agricultural work to farmers. The Committee further notes the information in the Government’s report of 7 June 2010, that an interdepartmental working group was established, and a programme approved, for on-the-ground monitoring to prevent the use of forced labour by schoolchildren during the cotton harvest. The Government indicates that the supervision of labour legislation and regulations (including the prohibition on employing children in adverse working conditions) is carried out by the specifically authorized stated legal and technical inspections of the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection and trade union workers, pursuant to section 9 of the Labour Code and Government Resolution No. 29 of 19 February 2010. In addition, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in this report that it is collaborating with UNICEF, which is carrying out a subproject entitled “Support for the implementation of the NPA on child labour” within the framework of the UNICEF Child Protection Programme for the country. In this regard, the Committee notes that the 2009 UNICEF factsheet entitled “Uzbekistan Fast Facts” (available on the UNICEF website: www.unicef.org) states that ensuring all children stay in school throughout the entire academic year and are not forced to harvest cotton is a priority for the Child Protection Programme. Another document on the UNICEF website entitled “The situation of women and children in Uzbekistan” states that the issue of child labour in the cotton sector remains to be fully addressed.

While noting the Government’s information on the numerous measures taken to monitor the involvement of schoolchildren in the cotton harvest, including measures taken within the framework of the NPA on Convention No. 138 and Convention No. 182, the Committee notes an absence of information from the Government on the concrete results of this monitoring, particularly information on the number of children, if any, detected by the labour inspectorate (or any other national monitoring mechanism) engaged to work in the cotton harvest. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to provide information on the concrete impact of the various measures taken to monitor the prohibition of the use of forced child labour in the agricultural sector. Furthermore, the Committee urges the Government to strengthen the capacity and expand the reach of the labour inspectorate in enforcing the laws giving effect to the Convention to ensure that school-age children in rural and disadvantaged areas are not removed from school for the purpose of cotton production and harvesting. It requests the Government to provide detailed information on the results achieved in this regard, particularly the number and nature of violations detected with regard to children under 18 working in the cotton harvest, and the penalties imposed.

Part V of the report form. Application of the Convention in practice. Forced or compulsory labour in cotton production and hazardous work. The Committee notes that, while the Government provides information on the application of labour legislation and the employment of children in general, the Government does not provide any information on the engagement of children in the autumn 2010 cotton harvest, including their use in situations of forced labour or hazardous work. Nonetheless, it appears to the Committee that this practice remains prevalent in the country, especially in view of the ongoing project carried out with the assistance of UNICEF to address the situation of child labour in the cotton sector. In light of the Government’s assertion that children are not involved in the cotton harvest, the Committee considers it essential that independent monitors be granted unrestricted access to document the situation during the cotton harvest. In this regard, the Committee observes that the ITUC, ETUC, IUF, EFFAT, ETUF:TCL and EURATEX believe that a mission must be carried out as soon as possible in order to address the practice of child labour in the cotton sector and to initiate steps towards its eradication. The Committee further observes that the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards urged the Government to accept a high-level ILO tripartite observer mission that would have full freedom of movement and timely access to all situations and relevant parties, including in the cotton fields, in order to assess the implementation of Convention No. 182. Noting that the Government has yet to respond positively to this recommendation, the Committee strongly encourages the Government to accept a high-level ILO tripartite observer mission, and expresses the firm hope that such an ILO mission can take place in the very near future.

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

[The Government is asked to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 100th Session and to reply in detail to the present comments in 2011.]