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

Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Argentina (Ratification: 1960)

The Committee notes that the Government's report contains no reply to its comments. It hopes that the next report will include full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Article 1(c) of the Convention

1. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to section 7 of Act No. 20840, as amended by Act No. 21459 of 18 November 1976, under which sentences of imprisonment, involving the obligation to work, may be inflicted on any person who, through imprudence or negligence, destroys or damages raw materials, products, machinery, plant or other property of commercial, industrial, agricultural or mining enterprises or used for the provision of services. The Committee requested the Government to supply copies of the sentences relating to this provision. The Committee notes that no sentences were handed down in 1986 and 1987 under this provision, and that it was not possible to obtain information on previous years.

The Committee also notes from the Government's indications in its report, that the work performed by prisoners is considered as a form of treatment to re-integrate the individual into society and that the work is performed for social reasons.

The Committee refers to paragraphs 102 to 109 of its General Survey of 1979 on the Abolition of Forced Labour, in which it indicates that the Convention does not prohibit the exaction of compulsory labour from common offenders who are convicted; consequently, in most cases, labour imposed on persons as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law will have no relevance to the application of the Convention. On the other hand, any form of compulsory labour, including prison labour, falls within the scope of the Convention when it is imposed for any of the five reasons specified in the Convention.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the measures taken or contemplated in order to ensure that sentences involving compulsory labour are not imposed as a disciplinary measure in the field of work, and to secure the observance of the Convention on this point.

Article 1(d)

2. In its previous comments the Committee referred to certain restrictions on the exercise of the right to strike, enforced with penalties of imprisonment involving compulsory labour. In particular, section 194 of the Penal Code provides that imprisonment can be inflicted on persons who, without endangering the community, prevent, hinder or delay the normal functioning of land, water or air transport or the public communication services or services supplying water, electricity or energy-producing substances.

The Committee notes that the committee for the revision of the Penal Code has not yet reported, although there are no restrictions on the right to strike, which is enshrined in section 14 bis of the National Constitution.

The Committee requests the Government to report on the current state of the revision of the Penal Code, and hopes that measures to bring the national legislation into harmony with the Convention on this point will be adopted as soon as possible.

3. The Committee also referred to section 29 of Act No. 20318 of 26 April 1973 (brought back into force by Act No. 21808) respecting the civil defence service, with regard to the mobilisation of the population when essential public services and activities are disrupted, which, according to a statement by the Government in its report for Convention No. 29, is applicable not only to essential services in the strict sense of the term, but also to services that are not necessarily essential, such as transport and primary educuation.

The Committee notes the Government's statement in its report that the criteria adopted on the few occasions on which the above section has been applied are those indicated by the Committee in its comments.

The Committee also notes from the communication sent in this connection by the Ministry of Defense, which was forwarded by the Government, that during the present constitutional Government no call up has been made for the performance of the above compulsory services, even in the case of general strikes in which services were suspended that could have been considered essential.

In view of the fact that section 29 of Act No. 20318, in its present form, can be applied to services that are not necessarily essential, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that mobilisation can only be used in circumstances that endanger or threaten to endanger the life, safety and health of the whole or part of the population, so that the practice which, according to the Government, already exists, is reflected in statutory law. The Committee requests the Government to report any progress achieved in this respect.