Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) - China - Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (Ratification: 1997)

The Committee notes the Government’s reply to its previous direct request. It has also noted the comments made by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) on the application of the Convention, received in December 2002, as well as the Government’s reply to these comments.

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. Trafficking in persons for the purpose of exploitation. In the above communication, the ICFTU refers to the problem of trafficking in persons and alleges that Hong Kong is a transit country for persons trafficked from China to third countries, and also a destination country for persons trafficked to Hong Kong, either for the purpose of forced prostitution or for the purpose of forced domestic service, and that organized criminal groups in Hong Kong are largely responsible for these activities.

In its reply, the Government accepts that Hong Kong is vulnerable for human smuggling activities and states that debriefings from illegal immigrants intercepted revealed that the destination for the great majority of them was Hong Kong, rather than overseas countries. However, the Government denies that they are being trafficked into Hong Kong under coercion or false inducement and indicates that they are coming at their own accord because of the comparative economic prosperity of Hong Kong in the region. According to the Government, in 2002 only three cases of trafficking in women for the purpose of prostitution, involving seven women above the age of 16, were reported in Hong Kong. The Government also states that there is no evidence of trafficking for the purpose of forced domestic service in Hong Kong.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement to the effect that it takes a serious attitude towards the problem of human smuggling. The Government indicates that the three law enforcement agencies (the Immigration Department, the Customs and Excise Department and the Hong Kong Police Force) act closely under the policy framework set by Security Bureau in combating the problem, and also maintain close cooperation with their overseas counterparts on liaison and intelligence exchange, joint investigation and operation.

The Committee previously noted the Government’s reply to its 2000 general observation concerning trafficking, in which the Government stated, as regards human trafficking or exploitation cases, that it is always the intention of law enforcement officers to bring the main culprits, i.e. traffickers or exploiters to court, but a successful prosecution case depends very much on whether the victims are willing to cooperate by providing useful information to assist investigations and giving evidence in court. The Government further indicated that victims of human trafficking cases are always encouraged to assist in investigation and to give evidence against traffickers, and that the Social Welfare Department had organized a Witness Support Programme for vulnerable witnesses since 1996. The Committee has also noted the Government’s indication that Part IIIA of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance (Chapter 221) provides special procedures for vulnerable witnesses in giving evidence. The Committee would appreciate it if the Government would supply a copy of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance with its next report, as well as the information on the application in practice of the Witness Support Programme referred to above.

Please also provide information on any legal proceeding which might have been instituted against traffickers and on the penalties imposed, and in particular, as regards the three cases of trafficking in women for the purpose of prostitution, which involved seven women above the age of 16, referred to by the Government in its report.

Article 25. The Committee previously noted the Government’s statement in its report, that there is no specific penal provisions punishing the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour, but offences such as false imprisonment and offences against the person might most likely be committed in cases of illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour, such offences being punishable under the general criminal law. The Committee noted the criminal law provisions communicated by the Government, and in particular, sections 24 and 25 of the Crimes Ordinance, Cap. 200, punishing intimidation and assaults with intent to cause certain acts to be done or omitted, as well as the Government’s explanations concerning their interpretation.

While noting the Government’s repeated indication in the report that no legal proceedings have been instituted in connection with the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour, the Committee again requests the Government to continue to provide, in its future reports, information on the application in practice of the general criminal law provisions referred to above, supplying copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their scope, as well as, more particularly, information on any legal proceedings which might have been instituted in connection with the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour and on any penalties imposed.