Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2024, published 113rd ILC session (2025)

Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) - China (Ratification: 2022)

The Committee notes the report of the Government providing a detailed overview of the laws and regulations aimed at giving effect to the Convention.

Article 1(1). Constitutional duty to work. The Committee notes that in accordance with Article 42 of the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China, citizens have the right as well as the duty to work; that work is the glorious duty of every able-bodied citizen; and that the state encourages citizens to take part in voluntary labour. The Committee recalls that a general statement of principle which establishes a moral duty does not affect the application of the Convention. However, a constitutional provision expressing a duty to work should not give rise to the regulatory framework at any level creating a legal obligation, enforceable with sanctions, for able-bodied citizens to engage in a gainful occupation. The Committee requests the Government to provide any judicial or administrative interpretations of Article 42 confirming the exclusively moral nature of the constitutional duty to work, particularly in the light of comments below concerning possible legal obligations placed upon particular categories of workers to provide services.

Article 2(1). Freedom of certain categories of workers to leave their service. As part of its examination of the application of the Convention, the Committee reviews legislative provisions imposing restrictions on certain persons to resign (such as civil servants, career army officers, police officers or navy personnel) or terminate their employment relationship subject to giving a minimum period of notice. In this regard, the Committee notes the following provisions:

• section 81 of the Civil Servants Law of the People's Republic of China (2005) which when read together with Article 6 of the Regulations on the Grading of Newly Recruited Civil Servants (2008) appear to prohibit civil servants from resigning from public office before the completion of five years of service, including the probationary period;
• sections 12 and 17 of the Regulations on the Personnel Management of Public Institutions (2014), which appear to suggest a minimum period of service of not less than 3 years of employees of public institutions;
• section 23 of the Regulations on Seafarers (2007) prohibiting the captain and officers of a ship to resign from their duties on their own initiative during the voyage;
• section 21(9) of the Measures for the Management of Fishery Crew (2014 prohibiting fishers to resign from their duties on their own initiative during the voyage;
• sections 43–45 of the Law of the People's Republic of China on Active-Duty Military Officers (1988) which provide the minimum number of years of active service for military, political, logistical, and armament officers in peacetime;
• paragraph 3 of the Notice of the General Office of the Ministry of Education on the implementation of the 2020 Special Plan for Teachers in Remote and Impoverished Areas, Border Ethnic Areas, and Old Revolutionary Base Areas (2020) which appears to prescribe a minimum period of one year for supportive teachers in remote areas with encouragement to continue service.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate if any restrictions to terminate service or employment relationship referred to above remain in force or have been superseded or repealed and, if not, the measures it envisages to take with a view to ensuring adequate protection of these workers with regard to terminating their employment by means of notice of reasonable length, including their right to have recourse to the courts, if necessary.

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. Vulnerable situation heightening the risk of forced labour among certain categories of workers. The Committee notes that in accordance with Article 2 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Labor Dispute Cases (I) (2020) disputes over work-related claims by domestic workers, apprentices, and employees of small-scale agricultural businesses (农村承包经营户) fall outside the scope of the labour arbitration system. The Committee requests the Government, considering these categories of workers are at particular risk of forced labour, to indicate the measures taken to provide protection against the threat of forced labour and the remedies available to them in that regard, in particular access to judicial mechanisms. It also requests the Government to provide information on the role of labour inspection services and trade unions in eliminating forced labour, referred to in the Government’s report, including statistical data of forced labour detected, prosecutions initiated and penalties imposed.

Articles 1(1) and 2(2)(c). Prisoners’ labour. The Committee notes Articles 4, 69, 70 and 71 of the Prison Law (2012) according to which all able-bodied persons convicted by the court system in accordance with the Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure Law are under a legal obligation to work. It further notes various local regulations governing the work performance and labour protections of prisoners and the duties of authorities in charge of supervising the state-owned assets of prison enterprises, such as the Guangdong Provincial Measures for the Administration of Labor Quotas and Labor Remuneration for Prison Convicts (2008), the Shanghai Municipal Prison Administration Bureau Prison Affairs Open Manual and the Provisions on the Administration of Labour Remuneration for Convicts (2020). As the Committee has noted in its general observation of 1999, the Convention's general prohibition of the use of forced or compulsory labour in all its forms -- by which is meant all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily - does not apply to any work or service exacted as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law, provided that it is carried out under the supervision and control of a public authority and the person is not hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations. The Committee requests the Government to include in its next report information as to the present situation in law and practice as regards the eight specific questions regarding hiring prison labour to private parties or placing it at their disposal raised in its general observation of 1999.

Articles 1(1) and 2(2)(c). Compulsory work in detention centres (拘留所). The Committee notes the Law on Public Security Administration Penalties (2005), which provides a legal basis for administrative sanctions by public security authorities in circumstances where public safety is endangered, personal rights or property rights are violated, or social management is obstructed but the severity of the offence is not considered sufficient for criminal punishment (Article 2). It observes that the Law stipulates the administrative sanctions that may be imposed for a wide range of “minor offences” such as forcing others to work by violence, threats, or other means (Article 40(2)). It further notes that Article 63 of the Measures for the Implementation of the Regulation on Detention Facilities provides that detention centres (拘留所) may organize appropriate labour education or vocational skills training for detainees within the facility, on the premise of ensuring safety and the detainees' voluntary consent. Detention facilities must not force or covertly force detainees to engage in productive labour. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the guarantees for obtaining voluntary consent and, where needed, remedies available to persons claiming to have been subject to forced labour in administrative detention. Information is also requested on the application in practice of Article 40(2) of the Law, in particular the criteria used by public security authorities to distinguish between forced labour as a “minor offence” and as a “criminal offence”, which Article 244 of the Criminal Law makes punishable with a fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years or criminal detention, and concurrently or independently with a fine.

Articles 1(1) and 2(2)(c). Compulsory work in remand centres (看守所). The Committee notes Article 2 of the Regulations on Remand Centres (1990) according to which the public security authorities also supervise remand centres (看守所) where they may detain persons under criminal investigation or criminal prosecution (pre-trial detention) and offenders who have been sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of less than one year, or whose remaining sentence is less than one year, when it is impractical for them to be sent to labour reform facilities for the execution of their sentences. Persons in the pre-trial phase may be detained for a maximum of 37 days which may be extended. Articles 33 and 34 authorize remand centres to “provide prisoners with labour education” and organize them to perform appropriate labour provided “strict procedures” guarantee their income and expenditure. The Code of Conduct for Detainees in Detention Centers stipulate, among other instructions, that detainees must complete labour tasks with quality and quantity and observe labour discipline (Articles 34 to 40). The Committee recalls that the Convention does not permit compulsory labour of persons who have not been duly convicted by a court of law. It also notes that UN Committee against Torture has called on the Government to reduce the 37-day maximum period of police custody and ensure, in law and in practice, that detained persons are promptly brought before a judge within a time limit in accordance with international standards, which should not exceed 48 hours. The Committee understands that a draft Law on Criminal Detention Centres has been under consideration by the National Peoples’ Congress since 2014 and requests the Government to indicate if it intends to pursue this legal reform to bring law and practice in line with the Convention. It also requests information as to whether offenders serving a sentence of less than 1 year are subject to the same rules as persons detained in the pre-trial phase and whether either category may be hired or put at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations.

Articles 1(1) and 2(2)(c). Compulsory work for rehabilitation purposes in compulsory drug dependency treatment. The Committee notes the Anti-Narcotics Law (2007), which provides for compulsory isolated rehabilitation for persons with drug dependence who have refused to receive community-based rehabilitation or have failed to maintain abstinence in the community, or have been arrested for suffering from a severe drug dependency disorder. According to Article 43 of the Law rehabilitation centers may organize productive labour for persons receiving treatment, provided such labour is remunerated, as well as organize vocational skills training. According to Article 59 of the Measures for the Administration of Compulsory Isolation and Detoxification Centers by Public Security Authorities, the rehabilitation centers must take into account while organizing productive labour, the needs of drug rehabilitation; the physical condition of the person receiving treatment; and a maximum of six hours of work per day. Persons receiving treatment must not be forced to participate in labour. The Committee requests the Government, in the light of the fact that compulsory isolated rehabilitation appears to involve detention based on a decision by public security authorities rather than a court of law, to indicate in its next report the guarantees available in practice to persons receiving treatment to ensure their participation in productive labour is genuinely free and if the Government would consider to include the administrative prohibition of forced labour in the Law rather than in the administrative measures considering it concerns a fundamental principle and right at work.

Article 2(2)(a) of the Convention. Compulsory military service. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that according to the relevant provisions of the Constitution and the Military Service Law, the conscription system is geared solely towards military purposes. The Committee requests the Government to provide specific information on the types of work that may be assigned to them.

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2025 .]