Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2016, publiée 106ème session CIT (2017)

Convention (n° 105) sur l'abolition du travail forcé, 1957 - Turkménistan (Ratification: 1997)

Autre commentaire sur C105

Observation

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

Penalties involving compulsory labour. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the clarifications provided by the Government in its report concerning administrative detention, administrative sanctions involving community service, and corrective labour. The Committee notes the Government’s information that under section 49 of the Administrative Offences Code, 2013, administrative detention can be applied in exceptional cases for specific administrative offences when, taking into account the circumstances of the case and the person committing the offence, other types of sanctions are considered to be insufficient. The Government indicates that administrative detention does not include an obligation to carry out community service or compulsory work.

The Government also indicates that section 576(1) of the Administrative Offences Code contains the conditions under which a court may impose an administrative sanction in the form of community service that may be carried out at locations determined by the governor of the provinces or cities. These community services may include: cleaning the streets and pavements of the district or town and upkeep of public amenities; working in rural areas (crop, livestock or poultry farming); and upkeep of grounds to prevent natural disasters (floods, landslides, earthquakes). The Committee further notes the Government’s clarification that “corrective labour”, according to section 50 of the Criminal Code, is used as a sentence by a court to be served by an offender at his/her place of work or other place in the offender’s area of residence, with the payment of an appropriate salary.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Penal sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the allegations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) that the Government denies freedom of association and expression and that human rights defenders act at great personal risk and anonymously to avoid harassment and reprisals. It also noted that the European Union, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Human Rights Committee, the Committee against Torture, had expressed concern at the severe restrictions on freedom of expression in the country and the consistent allegations of reported arbitrary arrests on criminal charges of human rights defenders and journalists, apparently in retaliation for their work (European Union, Press release of 17 June 2015 on “EU–Turkmenistan Human Rights Dialogue”, CCPR/C/TKM/CO/1, CAT/C/TKM/CO/1, A/HRC/17/27/Add.1, A/HRC/WG.6/ 16/TKM/2, A/HRC/WG.6/16/TKM/3 and A/HRC/24/3).

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that administrative sanctions established under section 63 of the Administrative Offences Code, 2013, are applicable for breaches of rules regulating the conduct of assemblies, marches, demonstrations or any other mass events. Similarly, criminal sanctions under section 223 of the Criminal Code are applicable to those citizens against whom administrative sanctions for the breach of rules on organizing or conducting assemblies, rallies, marches or demonstrations have already been incurred. The Government clarifies that none of the above provisions are applied for expressing one’s political views or opinions, but for violating the conditions of conducting such assemblies and mass events. The Government also indicates in its report submitted under the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), that administrative penalties under section 63 of the Code shall include a warning or the imposition of an administrative fine or administrative detention for a period of up to ten days. Moreover, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Turkmen Parliament adopted the Organization and Conduct of Assemblies, Public Rallies, Demonstrations and other Mass Events Act on 28 February 2015 which provides that citizens can exercise their constitutional right to gather peacefully, conduct assemblies, public rallies, demonstrations and other mass events.

The Committee notes however, that the Government’s report does not contain any information with regard to the legal provisions noted by the Committee, in its previous comments, such as: (i) sections 176 and 192 of the Criminal Code which establish penalties of fines, correctional labour of up to two years or imprisonment for a period of up to five years, for offences related to any insult or defamation against the President, and libel against a judge, lay judge, prosecutor, investigator or the person conducting the inquiry; and (ii) section 30(3) of the Internet Development and Services Law of 2014, concerning the liability of Internet users for the truthfulness of all the information that they post, and the publication of materials which contain insults or defamation against the President.

In this regard, the Committee notes the statement made by a Government representative at the Conference Committee on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations in June 2016 that the implementation of the provisions of the national law should not be interpreted as a punishment and should not thus fall under the prohibition of Article 1(a) of the Convention. The Committee also notes from the report of the Technical Advisory Mission that took place in Ashgabat from 26 to 29 September 2016 that it was clear from the meetings held with some of the stakeholders, including various UN agencies, that the practice of forced labour imposed for expressing political views exists. The Committee therefore once again urges the Government to take the necessary measures, in both law and practice, to ensure that no penalties involving compulsory labour may be imposed for the peaceful expression of political opinion or views opposed to the established system. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of sections 176 and 192 of the Criminal Code and section 30(3) of the Internet Development and Services Law of 2014.

Article 1(c). Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s information that pursuant to section IV of the Disciplinary Regulations, disciplinary sanctions for a breach of labour discipline by a crew member on board a vessel or on the premises or territory of marine transport undertakings shall include: service note; reprimand; serious reprimand; warning; transfer to another vessel with a lower salary for officers; work on shore appropriate to the offender’s profession for a maximum of one year; withdrawal, cancellation or suspension of licence for a period of one to three years; and dismissal. The Government also indicates that disciplinary sanctions for crew members on vessels do not involve compulsory labour.

Article 1(d). Sanctions involving compulsory labour for participation in strikes. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the Government’s statement that section 16 of the Civil Service Act prohibits strikes by civil servants. The Committee also referred to its comments made on the application of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), where it noted further restrictions on the right to strike. The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the sanctions that might be imposed on workers who participate in strikes, more particularly in the civil service.

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report under Convention No. 87 that according to section 395 of the Labour Code, disputes between workers and their representatives and employers and their representatives arising at various levels of the social partnership are settled through two stages of reconciliation procedures: (i) the settlement of a collective labour dispute by a reconciliation committee; and (ii) the consideration of a collective labour dispute in the judicial bodies if no agreement is reached in the reconciliation committee. Representatives of the parties and the reconciliation committee shall make use of all opportunities provided for under the law to settle a collective labour dispute that has arisen. The Government further states that there are no registered cases of strikes in the country.