Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1988, Publication: 75th ILC session (1988)

The Government has communicated the following information:

The collective agreements provided in 1987 were concluded between the Association of Peruvian Shipowners and the Peruvian Federation of Seafarers. In accordance with Peruvian legislation, "seafarers" means those who show they have satisfactorily completed the corresponding training course organised by the National Merchant Marine School as well as the Training, Qualification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers Standards and obtained the boarding document from the maritime authorities (section B030308 and following of the Captaincy and Marine, River and Lake Activities Regulations). Thus, the collective agreements in question only apply to ordinary seafarers, since officers are covered by other collective agreements.

The above-mentioned Regulations, approved by Supreme Decree No. 02-87-MA of 9 April 1987, brought the Peruvian maritime legislation up to date and regulate the organisation, jurisdiction and functions of the maritime authority in maritime, river and lake activities in Peru and the supervision of activities in navigable waters, as well as personnel and material questions in the national merchant marine, fishing and water sports: maritime labour and similar activities; protection of the marine environment and its resources and wealth; safety of life at sea and on navigable rivers and lakes, safety and supervision of ports and docks; and the struggle against smuggling and other illegal activities within its competence. It also decides on administrative procedures for the investigation of damage or accidents to ships or persons, damage to cargo and contamination of waters.

The Regulations are obviously wide-ranging and comprehensive and they include the working conditions of seafarers on board ship.

As regards the Convention, the Regulations deal with the quantity and quality of food and catering on board ship and the right of crew members to make complaints to the competent authorities in respect of the quality and quantity of food provided on board. Yet there are some gaps and some unclear provisions in the Regulations which are being studied in detail by those concerned with a view to amending them.

Legislation dealing specifically with food and catering on board ship is envisaged.

Besides this, Parliament is studying a law to regulate working conditions of seafarers on board ship. Further, the present Committee should be informed that a tripartite seminar is taking place in Peru this month with participation of all professional maritime organisations in order to lay the foundations for working conditions on board ship.

In addition, a Government representative stated that, with respect to the observations made by the Committee of Experts on the necessity to adopt legislation on food and catering arrangements and to establish a labour inspection system, two legal provisions existed. The first, Supreme Decree No. 012-77-SA of October 1977, contained rules concerning the approval by the Ministry of Health for water for human consumption and the periodic control of equipment. As well, it set out the rules which must be observed in the supply, storage and handling of food. The other legal provision which covered ships' crews was the Captaincy Rules issued in 1987 which were intended to bring into conformity national legislation with ratified Conventions, including the present Convention. These rules specified that before ships set sail verification must be made that, according to the route, time of year, duration of the voyage and other foreseeable factors, sufficient supplies were on board. They also established the responsibilities of the administration. In regard to the establishment of an inspection system, the rules also required periodic inspection. Inspectors must record any deficiencies found, and these would be subject to sanctions. The rules also established the right of ships' crews if they numbered no less than one-third, to protest against the quantity and quality of the food supplied to them to the Maritime or Consular Authorities. The directorate of the Captaincy would take into consideration the comments made by the sectors affected by the rules so that any necessary modifications could be made. The Maritime Authorities had stated that with respect to the observations made by the Committee of Experts, that one of the issues which would be completed would be the supply of food and catering services. In conclusion, the Government representative stated that studies were being carried out with the aim of eventually enacting a law which would regulate the working conditions of ships' crews and that assistance in this matter had been requested from the ILO.

The Employers' members stated that collective agreements were also a means of applying the Convention, but what needed to be known was who were covered by these agreements. They asked if in Peru there existed the possibility to extend collective agreements by national legislation. They thought that the legal texts which had been referred to should be communicated to the ILO in order that they could be examined for any shortcomings and the means by which these could be overcome. They hoped that in the next report the Government would reply to the observations made by the trade unions in regard to the application of this Convention.

The Workers' members associated themselves with the comments made by the Employers' members. They remarked that this case had been discussed in 1983, 1984 and 1986, and that it had been the subject of a special paragraph in 1984. They hoped that the law to which the Government representative had referred would be enacted as quickly as possible and that the information requested from the Government, especially on the points raised by the Peruvian trade unions, would be sent as quickly as possible to the ILO.

The Worker member of Argentina expressed his agreement with the remarks made by the Workers' members' spokesman. He stressed the importance that food supplies and catering arrangements had for seafers given the nature of their work which obliged them to live away from their families for long periods of time. He asked the Government representative to urge her Government to undertake the necessary legislative measures to fulfil the provisions of the present Convention.

The Government representative stated that her Government recognised that the provisions of the Convention had not been fully complied with, but that they were endeavouring to bring into conformity all legislation with the provisions of international Conventions. She referred to the problems that arose when responsibilities were shared with other sectors; in the present case the Ministry of Defence of which depends also the Merchant Navy. In reply to the Employers' members on the question of collective agreements, she stated that collective agreements which applied to ships' crews members had been sent to the ILO; those which applied to officers would be sent shortly.

The Committee takes note of the detailed written and oral information supplied by the Government. As pointed out in the observation of the Committee of Experts, laws or regulations should be adopted to give effect to several Articles of the Convention. The indications given by the Government show that the regulations adopted in 1987 do not meet all these requirements, especially since the case was discussed for many years. The Committee hopes that the Government will take all necessary measures in the near future, with the assistance of the ILO, and supply full information in this respect.

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

The Committee notes the reports provided by the Government on the application of Conventions Nos 22, 23, 55, 56, 68, 69 and 147. It also notes the observations of the National Confederation of Private Business Institutions (CONFIEP) and the Autonomous Workers’ Confederation of Peru (CATP), received on 29 August and 1 September 2024, respectively. The Committee regrets to note that there has not been any progress in the adoption of the necessary measures to give full effect to the provisions of the Conventions. The Committee therefore urges the Government to adopt the necessary measures for this purpose without further delay, taking into account the points raised below.

The Committee recalls that, in the context of the Standards Review Mechanism, the Governing Body of the ILO has included an item on the agenda of the 118th Session (2030) of the International Labour Conference for the abrogation of Conventions Nos 22, 23, 55, 56, 68 and 69 and has requested the Office to carry out an initiative to promote, as a priority, the ratification of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, as amended (MLC, 2006), by countries that are bound by the above Conventions. Noting that almost all the maritime Conventions ratified by Peru (with the exception of Convention No. 147) will in principle be abrogated in 2030, the Committee encourages the Government to ratify the MLC, 2006.

In order to provide an overview of matters arising in relation to the application of the maritime Conventions, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine them in a single comment, which is set out below.

Seamen ’ s Articles of Agreement Convention, 1926 (No. 22)

Article 3 of the Convention. Guarantees relating to the signature of articles of agreement. The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in reply to its comments, that Bill No. 5869/2023-CR, regulating the status and recognition of maritime workers, the provisions of which are related to the Convention, is currently being reviewed by the Labour and Social Security Commission of the Congress of the Republic. While noting this information, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures without delay to ensure compliance with the guarantees relating to the signature of articles of agreement and to give full effect to Article 3.

Articles 4 and 6. Clauses and particulars of the articles of agreement. The Committee notes that, in its reply to its previous comments, in addition to referring to the Bill noted above, the Government indicates that, although provisions have not been adopted on the clauses or content of the articles of agreement, that does not prevent the National Labour Inspection Supervisory Authority (SUNAFIL) from verifying compliance in general terms with social and labour rules in the maritime sector. The Committee also notes the CATP’s indication that, despite section 444(4) of the Regulations issued under Legislative Decree No. 1147 on the strengthening of the armed forces within the areas of competence of the National Maritime Authority – Port and Coastguard Directorate-General (DICAPI), which provides that “The competent authority shall specify the clauses to be included in the articles of agreement of seafarers, in accordance with the national legislation and the international instruments to which Peru is a party …”, this is not referred to in any of the other sections of the Regulations, and there do not exist national laws specifically regulating the articles of agreement of seafarers. The CATP adds that, as there are no specific regulations, the engagement of seafarers is governed by the rules applicable to private activity, without taking into account the atypical conditions of seafarers, who are therefore vulnerable in relation to articles of agreement and their fundamental rights are violated. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard. It also requests the Government to take the necessary measures without further delay to give full effect to Article 4 and to establish the particulars and clauses to be included in the articles of agreement of seafarers under section 444(4) of the Regulations issued under Legislative Decree No. 1147 and in conformity with Article 6 of the Convention.

Article 5.Document recording service on board. The Committee notes that, in reply to its previous comments, the Government refers to the inspections carried out by the labour inspection services in the fishing sector, which are not relevant to the present case. It also notes the CATP’s indication that the State of Peru has not amended the legislation with a view to guaranteeing that seafarers receive a document containing a record of their employment on board. The CATP adds that the limited coordination between the authorities that enforce compliance with this requirement makes it impossible to verify compliance in practice. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect. It also requests the Government to take the necessary measures without further delay to give full effect to Article 5.

Articles 9 and 11. Termination of an agreement of an indefinite period. Immediate discharge. With reference to its previous comments, in which it noted that the Regulations issued under Legislative Decree No. 1147 do not give effect to these provisions, the Government notes that the Government refers in generic terms to the information provided on the previous points. It also notes the CATP’s indication that the general rules applicable to the private sector are the only ones implemented in this respect, which does not permit the direct application of the provisions of Article 9 of the Convention. In contrast, the rules governing private labour activities, contained in the Single Codified Text of Legislative Decree No. 728, the Act on labour productivity and competitiveness, Presidential Decree No. 003-97-TR, provides that notice of termination shall be 30 calendar days. With reference to Article 11 of the Convention, the CATP indicates that section 31 of the same Presidential Decree provides for immediate discharge in cases of “flagrant serious fault”, which makes it possible for employers to discharge workers abruptly, without having to comply with the regular procedure for termination of employment. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard. It also requests the Government to take the necessary measures without further delay to determine the conditions for the termination of articles of agreement for an indefinite period and the circumstances in which the shipowner or the master may immediately discharge a seafarer, in accordance with Articles 9 and 11.

Repatriation of Seamen Convention, 1926 (No. 23)

Article 6. Obligations of the public authority of the country in which the vessel is registered. Noting that, in accordance with section 755(2) of the Regulations issued under Legislative Decree No. 1147, the National Maritime Authority shall contribute to the prompt repatriation or re-embarkation of seafarers by the shipowner following a marine accident, the Committee previously requested the Government to provide information on the instructions received by the public authority to ensure the repatriation of seafarers without distinction of nationality and to advance repatriation expenses if necessary. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that it will provide information on this subject in the near future. The Committee also notes the CONFIEP’s indication that, despite the challenges implicit in the geographical area, companies comply with the provisions of the Convention and have established clear procedures for repatriation situations, including taking out insurance to cover the related costs. The Committee also notes the CATP’s indication that, although the National Maritime Authority is required to collaborate in the repatriation of seafarers, in practice there are no provisions under which this requirement is given effect. In this context, none of the obligations of the National Maritime Authority set out in section 775(2) of the Regulations issued under Legislative Decree No. 1147 (protection of the basic human rights of seafarers affected by a marine accident, rapid investigation of accidents, recording of cases of unfair treatment following a marine accident) are complied with in practice. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard. It also requests the Government to take the necessary measures without delay to give full effect to Article 6.

Shipowners ’ Liability (Sick and Injured Seamen) Convention, 1936 (No. 55)

Articles 6(3) and 8 of the Convention. Repatriation.Safeguarding property left on board. The Committee notes that, in reply to its request on the items of expense covered for the repatriation of a sick or injured seafarer (Article 6(3)) and the measures to safeguard property left on board in the case of sick or injured seafarers (Article 8), the Government indicates that it will provide information in the near future. It also notes the CONFIEP’s indication that formal fishing companies not only take occupational safety and health preventive action to minimize occupational accidents, but also, in the event that any work-related accident occurs, they make claims from all insurance policies to provide compensation and ensure the provision of the necessary medical care in the event of sickness or injury. The Committee also notes the CATP’s indication that there is a clear legislative disparity between the occupational safety and health legislation (Act No. 29783 on occupational safety and health) and the Regulations issued under Legislative Decree No. 1147 since, while the former provides that occupational accidents and diseases shall be registered on the platform of the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion (MTPE) by the employer or the corresponding occupational doctor, the latter envisage a different role for the National Maritime Authority. With reference to Article 8, the CATP indicates that there is currently no legislation in force in Peru providing for the safeguarding of property left on board by sick or injured seafarers. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard. It also requests the Government to take the necessary measures without further delay to determine the items of expense covered for the repatriation of a sick or injured seafarer (Article 6(3)) and to ensure the safeguarding of property left on board by sick or injured seafarers.

Sickness Insurance (Sea) Convention, 1936 (No. 56)

The Committee notes the CATP’s indication that, as a result of the legislative fragmentation respecting the social security system for fishers, of the approximately 133,000 workers who were in the fishing sector in 2022, only 37 per cent are affiliated to any insurance scheme in Peru, while 63 per cent do not have any social insurance coverage. It adds that efforts were made to ensure compulsory insurance coverage for artisanal fishers (a group which includes the great majority of workers in the sector) through Act No. 30636 establishing the Compulsory Insurance Scheme for Artisanal Fishers (SOPA). This scheme operated as an insurance for personal accidents and covered the risks of the death and physical injury of self-employed artisanal fishers and crewmembers, as well as third persons who are not in the crew, during fishing work, as a consequence of an accident in which the vessel is involved, including in waters adjacent to the maritime domain. The CATP indicates that, regrettably, regulations were never issued under Act No. 30636 and that in 2022 it was repealed by Act No. 31428, and that full effect is not therefore given to Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention in Peru. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect.

Minimum Age (Sea) Convention (Revised), 1936 (No. 58)

The Committee notes the indication by the CONFIEP that the effective implementation of this Convention in the national context faces various challenges. Young persons who work in the maritime sector are faced by a variety of risks and hazards, including extreme working conditions, such as very long hours of work, the lack of rest, work in confined spaces, exposure to hazardous substances and the risk of accidents. One of the main difficulties in the application of this Convention in Peru lies in the high rate of informality characteristic of the maritime sector. The absence of labour registers and the difficulty of identifying workers, especially minors, makes effective enforcement difficult. This is compounded by the limited capacity of the competent authorities to carry out inspections, which facilitates non-compliance with labour rules, including those respecting the minimum age for admission to work. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard.

Food and Catering (Ships ’ Crews) Convention, 1946 (No. 68)

Article 3 of the Convention. Cooperation with organizations of shipowners and seafarers. The Committee notes that, in reply to its comments, the Government indicates that it will provide information in the near future. The Committee also notes the CATP’s indication that the legislation in force does not provide any legislative guarantee to ensure the existence in practice of effective cooperation between the Government and the organizations of shipowners and seafarers, and that effect is not therefore given to Article 3. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect. It also requests the Government to take the necessary measures without further delay to ensure cooperation between the competent authority and the organizations of shipowners and seafarers in relation to food and catering on board.

Article 11(2). Refresher courses. The Committee notes the CATP’s indication that, although the Government had indicated previously that there were some training courses related to work performed by seafarers, the current legislation in Peru does not directly establish the requirement for refresher courses for personnel involved in the provision of food and catering on board ships. It adds that it is reported to be a common practice that the personnel responsible for the provision of food do not always have the necessary qualifications or skills for that purpose, which is the clear responsibility of the shipowners who recruit such workers. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect.

Article 12. Collection and dissemination of information and recommendations. The Committee notes that, in reply to its previous comments, the Government once again indicates that it will provide information in the near future. It also notes the CATP’s indication that, over eight years since the Committee’s request (of 2016), the Government of Peru has not managed to provide information on this subject, since in practice no action has been taken on the collection and dissemination of information on food and catering on board ships. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect. It also requests the Government to take the necessary measures without further delay for the collection and dissemination of information and for issuing recommendations on food and catering.

Certification of Ships ’ Cooks Convention, 1946 (No. 69)

Article 4(4) of the Convention. Examination for a certificate of qualification. The Committee notes that, in reply to its previous request, the Government indicates that it will provide information in the near future. The Committee also notes the CATP’s indication that, although it is currently the DICAPI that establishes guidance for the provision of courses, shipping companies are also responsible for the provision of courses and their content, which not only gives rise to a potential conflict of interests, but is also a model that is not provided for in the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect. It also requests the Government to take the necessary measures without further delay to give full effect to Article 4(4), particularly in relation to the organization and content of the examination for the granting of a certificate of qualification for ships’ cooks.

Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 147)

Article 2(d)(i) and (ii) and (g) of the Convention. Procedures for the engagement of seafarers on Peruvian ships. Complaints concerning the engagement of seafarers on foreign ships. Publication of the report of an inquiry into a serious accident. The Committee notes that, in reply to its previous requests on these provisions, the Government indicates that it will provide information in the near future. It also notes the CATP’s indication that the possibility for the labour inspection services, under the responsibility of the SUNAFIL, to inspect ships depends on the collaboration and cooperation of the DICAPI. Up to now, no provision has been found which makes it possible to ensure the existence in practice of the collaboration that should exist between these two bodies, nor is there a protocol on intersectoral coordination envisaging such joint work. More specifically, in relation to Article 2(d)(i) and (ii), there are no legislative provisions in Peru respecting the engagement of seafarers, nor any procedures for complaints relating to the articles of agreement of seafarers. The CATP indicates that conditions on board (deficient Internet connection, little telephone communication, excessive periods on board, restrictions on shore leave, etc.), make it difficult for seafarers to have access to such procedures, which in many cases involve a visit to the offices of public bodies. The CATP adds that effect is not given to Article 2(g) since, although there exists a department for the investigation of maritime accidents by the National Maritime Authority, there are no procedures for the publication of information. The CATP adds that the possibility should exist, in line with the provisions of Article 4 of Convention No. 147, for workers’ organizations to be able to submit complaints or representations directly to the DICAPI, but there are no explicit provisions on this in the current legislation. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard. It also requests the Government to take the necessary measures without further delay to regulate the engagement of seafarers on ships registered in its territory (Article 2(d)(i)) and the procedures for the transmission of complaints concerning the engagement of seafarers on foreign ships (Article 2(d)(ii)), and to give full effect to the requirement for the final report of official inquiries into any serious accident involving ships registered in its territory to be made public (Article 2(g)).

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in its reports on the application of various maritime Conventions, that the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006), is being examined within the Technical Labour Committee of the National Council for Labour and Employment Promotion. The Committee also notes the adoption, by Supreme Decree No. 015-2014-DE of 28 November 2014, of the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147 on the strengthening of the armed forces in terms of the competencies of the National Maritime Authority – Port and Coastguard Directorate-General (DICAPI) (hereinafter Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147). The Committee also notes the information provided by the Government according to which officials of the Labour Inspection Policies Directorate-General at the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion (hereinafter Ministry of Labour) and of the National Labour Inspection Supervisory Authority (SUNAFIL) are drafting a “Maritime Labour Protocol” concerning inspections on board ships and forecast that the drafting process will be completed by January 2017. In order to provide an overview of matters arising in relation to the application of the maritime Conventions, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine them in a single comment, which is set out below.

The Committee observes that article 55 of the Political Constitution of Peru provides that treaties concluded by the State and still in force form part of national law. On this basis, the Committee requests the Government to confirm whether, in the absence of specific national provisions that give effect to the self-executing provisions of the Conventions, the latter provisions are directly applicable in Peru.

Unemployment Indemnity (Shipwreck) Convention, 1920 (No. 8)

Article 2(2) of the Convention. Amount of unemployment indemnity in case of shipwreck. In its previous comments, the Committee reminded the Government that the compensation mechanism of the common labour system, based on length of service, is not in conformity with the Convention, which provides for compensation based on the actual period of unemployment in the event of the loss or foundering of the ship. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 449(d) of the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147 provides that the foundering of a national vessel does not exempt the shipowner from payment of compensation resulting from the loss or foundering of the ship, in accordance with the national regulations and international instruments to which Peru is party. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether national provisions have been adopted which establish the amount of indemnity provided for in section 449 of the abovementioned Decree.

Placing of Seamen Convention, 1920 (No. 9)

Articles 1–10 of the Convention. System for the placement of seafarers. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the Convention was applied through Supreme Decree No. 018-73/MA of 18 December 1973, establishing the Seafarers’ Placement Office, and Ministerial Decision No. 1905-73/MA/SF of 21 December 1973, issuing the regulations for the Seafarers’ Placement Office. However, the Committee notes the Government’s indications that both legislative texts have been repealed. The Committee also notes the Government’s statement that seafarers’ placement offices ceased to operate after the Regulations implementing Act No. 26610 were issued and that there are currently no public or private bodies responsible for placing seafarers in employment. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that an efficient and adequate system of offices for finding employment for seafarers without charge is organized and maintained.

Seamen’s Articles of Agreement Convention, 1926 (No. 22)

Article 3 of the Convention. Guarantees relating to the signature of articles of agreement. In its previous comment, the Committee asked the Government to indicate the manner in which guarantees relating to the signature of articles of agreement are respected, as established by the Convention. In this respect, the Government refers to the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147. The Committee observes that although section 446 of the aforementioned Regulations guarantees the formalization before the Peruvian consul of articles of agreement concluded abroad, the said section does not establish the conditions for the signature of articles of agreement when the latter are concluded in Peru. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the provisions adopted or contemplated to give effect to Article 3 of the Convention.

Article 4. Clauses on the rules of jurisdiction. The Committee notes that section 444.4 of the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147 stipulates that the competent authority shall establish the clauses to be included in employment contracts for seafarers. However, the Committee observes the Government’s indication that no supplementary regulations have been issued regarding the clauses governing articles of agreement. The Committee recalls that, under the terms of the Convention, adequate measures must be taken to prevent articles of agreement from containing any stipulation by which the parties purport to contract in advance to depart from the ordinary rules as to jurisdiction over the agreement. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated to give effect to Article 4 of the Convention.

Article 5. Document recording service on board. The Committee notes that, under section 444.3 of the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147, shipowners shall adopt the necessary measures to ensure that seafarers, including the ship’s master, can easily obtain on board ship clear information on the terms of their employment, in particular a copy of the employment contract, and shall provide seafarers with a document containing a record of their service on board. However, the Committee observes that the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147 do not determine the form or the content of the record of service on board. The Committee recalls that, under the terms of the Convention, seafarers must be given a document containing a record of their service on board and that the legislation shall determine the form of the document, the particulars to be recorded and the manner under which the latter are to be entered in it. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to give effect to Article 5 of the Convention.

Article 9. Termination of an agreement for an indefinite period. In its previous comment, the Committee asked the Government to indicate the provisions that give effect to Article 9, under which an agreement for an indefinite period may be terminated by either party in any port where the vessel loads or unloads, provided that the notice specified in the agreement shall have been given in writing, which shall not be less than 24 hours. National law shall determine the exceptional circumstances in which notice even when duly given shall not terminate the agreement. The Committee notes that the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147 do not give effect to the provisions of this Article. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the provisions adopted or contemplated to give effect to Article 9 of the Convention.

Article 11. Immediate discharge. The Committee observes that the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147 do not lay down the conditions for immediate discharge. The Committee recalls that, under the Convention, national law shall determine the circumstances in which the owner or master may immediately discharge a seafarer. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to give effect to Article 11 of the Convention.

Article 14(2). Separate certificate regarding the quality of work. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to indicate how it is ensured that seafarers can obtain a separate certificate regarding the quality of their work from the ship’s master. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147. However, the Committee observes that the Regulations do not give effect to this provision of the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government once again to indicate the manner in which effect is given to Article 14(2) of the Convention.

Repatriation of Seamen Convention, 1926 (No. 23)

Article 3(1) and (4) of the Convention. Conditions of repatriation. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to clarify the status of law and practice regarding the conditions under which Peruvian and foreign seafarers have the right to repatriation. The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government to the effect that the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147 govern the conditions of repatriation of seafarers without distinction of nationality in accordance with this provision of the Convention.

Article 4(c). Repatriation expenses in the event of illness. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to indicate how it is ensured that the expenses of repatriation are not a charge on the seafarer in the event of illness. The Committee notes with interest that section 447.1 of the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147 prohibits the expenses of repatriation being a charge on the seafarer in the event of illness.

Article 6. Obligations of the public authority of the country in which the vessel is registered. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to provide information on the instructions received by the public authority to ensure the repatriation of seafarers without distinction of nationality and to advance repatriation expenses if necessary. The Committee notes that, under section 775.2 of the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147, the National Maritime Authority must help to enable the prompt repatriation or re-embarkation of seafarers by the shipowner further to a marine accident. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the analysis of the requested information is still in progress. While noting this information, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to give full effect to Article 6 of the Convention.

Food and Catering (Ships’ Crews) Convention, 1946 (No. 68)

Article 3 of the Convention. Cooperation with organizations of shipowners and seafarers. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to provide information on cooperation between the competent authority and organizations of shipowners and seafarers regarding food and catering on board ship. The Committee observes that although the Government supplies information on the coordination of activities between the authorities concerned, it does not indicate how cooperation between the competent authority and organizations of shipowners and seafarers is ensured. The Committee therefore requests the Government once again to provide information on the measures taken in this respect, in accordance with Article 3 of the Convention.

Article 11(2). Refresher courses. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to provide information on refresher courses for catering staff on ships. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that training for seafarers in food and catering on ships is carried out by the shipping companies in coordination with the various maritime and other training centres that provide training in the practical aspects of cooking, food and personal hygiene, food storage, management of stocks, and protection of the environment, and safety and health in catering. The Committee notes this information.

Article 12. Collection and dissemination of information and recommendations. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that the competent authority collects and disseminates information and issues recommendations on food and catering on ships. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the analysis of the requested information is still being completed with a view to forwarding the information to the Committee as soon as possible. The Committee requests the Government once again to provide details of the measures taken to collect and disseminate information and issue recommendations on food and catering.

Certification of Ships’ Cooks Convention, 1946 (No. 69)

Article 4(4) of the Convention. Examination for a certificate of qualification. The Committee recalls that, under the terms of the Convention, the competent authority shall prescribe the examination for the granting of a certificate of qualification as ship’s cook directly or, subject to its control, by an approved school for the training of cooks or other approved bodies. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the training of ships’ cooks is conducted by the shipping companies in coordination with the various maritime and other training centres that provide training in the practical aspects of cooking, food and personal hygiene, food storage, management of stocks, and protection of the environment, and safety and health in catering. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken by the competent authority to give effect to Article 4(4) of the Convention and to send information especially on the organization and content of the examination for the granting of a certificate of qualification as ship’s cook.

Article 6. Recognition of certificates. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to indicate whether or not provision had been made for the recognition of certificates of qualification issued by other countries. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that DICAPI recognizes foreign qualifications pursuant to section 385 of the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147.

Medical Examination (Seafarers) Convention, 1946 (No. 73)

Article 3 of the Convention. Recognition of certificates. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to provide information on the content of medical examinations for seafarers. The Committee notes with interest the adoption of Executive Decision No. 0619-2010/DCG of 13 August 2010, issuing regulations governing medical examinations for merchant navy personnel.

Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 147)

Article 2(a)(i) of the Convention. Safety standards. Substantial equivalence to Article 7 of Convention No. 134. Prevention of accidents. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to provide information on the members of the crew responsible for accident prevention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that accident prevention on board ship is the responsibility of the ship’s master, pursuant to sections 387, 400, 402, 403, 407, 408 and 409 of the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147. The Committee notes this information.

Article 2(b) and (f). Exercise of effective jurisdiction or control by the flag State. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to provide information on the control of ships flying the Peruvian flag with respect to safety on board ship, social security and conditions of employment. The Committee notes that sections 12, 14, 16, 312, 581, 603 and 642–645 of the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147 establish a system of control over safety on board ship. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that, under section 3 of the General Labour Inspection Act (No. 28806) the Ministry of Labour is responsible for the inspection of merchant ships, regardless of the flag they fly. The Committee notes this information.

Article 2(d)(i). Procedures for the engagement of seafarers on Peruvian ships. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that there are currently no public or private entities responsible for the placement of seafarers. The Committee recalls that, under the terms of the Convention, the Government must ensure that there are adequate procedures for the engagement of seafarers on ships registered in its territory. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures taken in law or in practice to ensure compliance with this provision of the Convention.

Article 2(d)(ii). Procedures for the transmission of complaints concerning the engagement of seafarers on foreign ships. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, under section 100 of the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147, when port State officials (OSERP) detect any defects which impede the sailing of the ship, they notify the harbourmaster’s office with a view to informing the flag State administration and, where appropriate, the recognized organizations that have issued relevant certificates on behalf of the flag State. While noting this information, the Committee recalls that, under the terms of the Convention, the Government must ensure that any complaint concerning the engagement in its territory of foreign seafarers on ships registered in a foreign country is reported to the competent authority of the country in which the ship is registered, with a copy to the Director-General of the International Labour Office. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to give effect to this provision of the Convention.

Article 2(g). Publication of the report on an inquiry into a serious accident. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to indicate how it is ensured that an official inquiry is held in the event of a serious maritime accident. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the DICAPI has a department for the investigation of maritime accidents, which is responsible for holding the relevant inquiries and forwarding the information to the corresponding bodies and organizations. The Committee recalls that the requirement of publication can be satisfied when the final report is made available to the interested parties and the conclusions are announced publicly (see 1990 General Survey on labour standards on merchant ships, paragraph 258). The Committee therefore requests the Government to clarify the manner in which the conclusions of the department for the investigation of maritime accidents are published.

Article 4. Port State control. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to specify whether complaints may be submitted to the port authority by professional bodies, associations or trade unions. The Committee notes the Government’s indications that any person with a legitimate interest, including trade unions and other professional bodies, may voice grievances to the port authority and file complaints through the system established at the Ministry of Labour, which is responsible for the inspection of merchant ships, irrespective of the flag they fly. The Committee notes this information.

Labour Inspection (Seafarers) Convention, 1996 (No. 178)

Article 1(7) of the Convention. Scope of inspection. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to clarify the scope of inspection of seafarers’ working and living conditions. The Committee notes the drafting of the “Maritime Labour Protocol”. The Committee also notes that sections 642.1 and 642.2 of the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147 provide that naval vessels and craft inspected by the Inspection and Audit Office of the National Maritime Authority must fulfil all conditions for ensuring the safety of human life at sea, conditions of accommodation and catering, and conditions of health and hygiene. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the Inspection and Audit Office investigates other aspects of seafarers’ working and living conditions such as conditions relating to minimum age, articles of agreement, recruitment, manning, qualifications, hours of work, prevention of occupational accidents, medical care, sickness and injury benefits, social welfare and related matters, and repatriation. The Committee also requests the Government to provide updated information on the drafting of the “Maritime Labour Protocol”.

Article 3(1). Periodic inspection of registered ships. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to indicate whether all Peruvian-flagged vessels above 500 gross tonnage are inspected at intervals not exceeding three years, with a view to verifying that seafarers’ working and living conditions are in conformity with the national legislation. The Committee notes that the Government does not provide any information in reply to this request. However, the Committee observes that section 649 of the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147 provides that national vessels undertaking international voyages must undergo the necessary inspections, together with the annual or periodic examination, to verify that they observe the appropriate conditions regarding accommodation, health, hygiene, prevention of occupational accidents, and food and catering. The Committee notes this information.

Article 4. Qualifications of inspectors. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to indicate by what means it is ensured that inspectors responsible for verifying seafarers’ working and living conditions have appropriate qualifications to perform their duties. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the DICAPI has a specialized department and OSERP officials perform duties in ports. However, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that it is for the Ministry of Labour to conduct inspections on board merchant ships, pursuant to section 3 of Act No. 28806. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information on the qualifications of inspectors of the Ministry of Labour who conduct inspections on board ship.

Article 9(1). Inspection report. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to indicate by what means it is ensured that, in the case of ship inspections, one copy of the inspection report is communicated to the master of the ship and another copy is posted on the ship’s noticeboard for the information of the seafarers. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 45(a) and (b) of Act No. 28806 provides that when the labour inspectorate establishes non compliance with social and labour obligations, it issues an infringement report and notifies the employer to that effect. However, the Committee observes that the aforementioned provision does not ensure that the master of the inspected ship receives a copy of the infringement report or that the report is posted on the ship’s noticeboard for the information of the seafarers. The Committee therefore requests the Government once again to indicate how effect is given to Article 9(1).

Article 9(2). Submission of the inspection report pursuant to a major incident. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to specify how it is ensured that, in the case of a ship inspection pursuant to a major incident, the inspection report is submitted as soon as practicable, but not later than one month, following the conclusion of the inspection. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 13 of Act No. 28806 provides that the investigation or verification activities of the labour inspectorate shall be carried out within the time frame indicated for each specific case, though this may not exceed 30 working days and, where necessary, authorization may be given to prolong the verification activity. The Committee therefore requests the Government once again to indicate which measures ensure that the inspection report pursuant to a major incident is submitted as quickly as possible.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in its reports on the application of various maritime Conventions, that the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006), is being examined within the Technical Labour Committee of the National Council for Labour and Employment Promotion. The Committee also notes the adoption, by Supreme Decree No. 015-2014-DE of 28 November 2014, of the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147 on the strengthening of the armed forces in terms of the competencies of the National Maritime Authority – Port and Coastguard Directorate-General (hereinafter Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147). The Committee also notes the information provided by the Government according to which officials of the Labour Inspection Policies Directorate-General at the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion (hereinafter Ministry of Labour) and of the National Labour Inspection Supervisory Authority are drafting a “Maritime Labour Protocol” concerning inspections on board ships and forecast that the drafting process will be completed by January 2017. In order to provide an overview of matters arising in relation to the application of the maritime Conventions, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine them in a single comment, which is set out below.

The Committee observes that article 55 of the Political Constitution of Peru provides that treaties concluded by the State and still in force form part of national law. The Committee requests the Government to confirm whether, on this basis, in the absence of specific national provisions that give effect to the self-executing provisions of the Conventions, the latter provisions are directly applicable in Peru.

Food and Catering (Ships’ Crews) Convention, 1946 (No. 68)

Article 7(2) of the Convention. Inspection at sea. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to take measures to ensure that the results of inspections carried out at sea by the ship’s master or a specially deputed officer are recorded in writing. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to the drafting of the “Maritime Labour Protocol” which is in progress. While noting this information, the Committee requests the Government once again to take the necessary measures without delay to give effect to Article 7(2).

Article 10. Annual report. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to provide information on the preparation of an annual report on food and catering on board ship. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the analysis of the requested information is still being completed. The Committee requests the Government once again to take the necessary measures without delay to give effect to Article 10.

Certification of Ships’ Cooks Convention, 1946 (No. 69)

Article 4(2)(b) of the Convention. Minimum period of service at sea. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to prescribe a minimum period of service at sea for obtaining a certificate of qualification as ship’s cook. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to sections 5(15), 374, 378 and 442 of the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147 and Supreme Decree No. 048-90-DE/MGP of 9 October 1990 approving the Regulations concerning ships’ cooks. However, the Committee observes that the aforementioned provisions do not establish a minimum period of service at sea for obtaining a certificate of qualification as ship’s cook. The Committee therefore requests the Government once again to take the necessary measures to give effect to Article 4(2)(b).

Medical Examination (Seafarers) Convention, 1946 (No. 73)

Article 3 of the Convention. Recognition of certificates. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to provide information on the content of medical examinations for seafarers. The Committee notes with interest the adoption of Executive Decision No. 0619-2010/DCG of 13 August 2010 issuing regulations governing medical examinations for merchant navy personnel.

Article 8. Further examination after refusal of a medical certificate. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to provide information on the provisions that ensure that a person who has been refused a certificate may apply for a further examination by one or more independent medical referees. The Committee notes that the Government refers to sections 49 and 71 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act No. 32222, which establish the obligation for the employer to conduct occupational medical examinations before, during and after the employment relationship. However, the Committee observes that the aforementioned provisions do not guarantee the right to request a second medical examination when the first has resulted in refusal. The Committee therefore requests the Government once again to take measures without delay to give effect to Article 8.

Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 147)

Article 2(a)(i) and (iii) of the Convention. Safety standards and shipboard living arrangements. Substantial equivalence to the Accommodation of Crews Convention (Revised), 1949 (No. 92). In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to consider appropriate measures to ensure that the national legislation contains provisions that are substantially equivalent to those concerning safety standards and shipboard living arrangements laid down in Convention No. 92. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that although the National Maritime Authority has the competence to issue supplementary regulations concerning accommodation pursuant to section 447.2 of the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147, it has not exercised that competence. The Committee observes that neither the Regulations nor the Code of Safety for the equipment of naval, maritime, river and lake vessels and craft, adopted by Executive Decision No. 0562-2003/DCG of 5 September 2003 (Safety Code) regulate the following matters relating to safety standards and shipboard living arrangements laid down in Convention No. 92: notification of the adoption of provisions concerning accommodation (Article 3(2)(a)), prior consultation of shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations regarding the framing of regulations on accommodation (Article 3(2)(e)), inspections when the ship has undergone alterations (Article 5), materials used (Article 6), adequate system of heating (Article 8(1) and (6)), adequate lighting (Article 9), location of sleeping rooms (Article 10(1)), recreation spaces (Article 12), sanitary accommodation for the crew (Article 13(1), (8) and (10)), hospital accommodation on board (Article 14), and weekly inspections (Article 17). The Committee recalls that these Articles are considered substantive provisions of Convention No. 92 relating to safety and shipboard living arrangements, with which compliance is necessary in order to establish the existence of substantial equivalence (see 1990 General Survey on labour standards on merchant ships, paragraphs 120, 174 and 175). The Committee requests the Government once again to take the necessary measures to ensure that the national legislation contains provisions substantially equivalent to those concerning safety standards and shipboard living arrangements established in Convention No. 92.

Labour Inspection (Seafarers) Convention, 1996 (No. 178)

Article 3(3) of the Convention. Inspection in cases of substantial changes. The Committee recalls that it asked the Government to indicate whether, in cases of substantial changes in construction or accommodation arrangements, the ship is inspected within three months of such changes. The Committee notes with regret that the Government indicates that the process of analysis is still being completed and does not provide any information in reply to its request. However, the Committee notes that section 579 of the Regulations implementing Legislative Decree No. 1147 provides that the alteration of naval vessels and craft is governed by technical standards established to that end by the Directorate-General but does not shed any light on whether these technical standards require an inspection within three months. The Committee therefore requests the Government once again to clarify whether substantial changes in ship construction or accommodation arrangements are inspected within three months of such changes.

Article 6(2). Compensation for unreasonable detention or delay. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to indicate how it is ensured that, if a ship is unreasonably detained or delayed, the shipowner or operator of the ship is entitled to compensation for any loss or damage suffered. The Committee notes with regret that the Government does not provide any information in reply to this request. The Committee therefore requests the Government once again to indicate the measures taken to give effect to this provision of the Convention.

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

Article 3 of the Convention. Cooperation with organizations of shipowners and seafarers and with national authorities. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report concerning the provisions contained in the Act of 30 May of 1996 on Ports and Activities at Sea and on Inland Waterways and legislation relating to the sanitary control of food and beverages. It recalls that the Convention requires that the activities of the various authorities be duly coordinated so as to avoid overlapping or uncertainty of jurisdiction. However, the Committee understands that the national legislation makes no provision for cooperation with shipowners and seafarers organizations and other entities, except in matters of labour inspection under section 33 of the Labour Inspection and Protection of Workers Act of 16 March 2001. In addition, the Committee recalls that the same requirement has been incorporated in Guideline B3.2.1(4) of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006). The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide additional information concerning the manner in which such collaboration and coordination are effectively ensured.

Article 5(2). Laws and regulations on food supplies and catering services. The Committee recalls its previous comment in which it noted that national legislation does not regulate the quantity and quality of the food supply and catering arrangements on board ships. It recalls, in this respect, that the same requirement has been incorporated in Standard A3.2(1) and (2)(a) of the MLC, 2006. In the absence of the Government’s reply on this point, the Committee once more requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the provision of food of suitable quantity and quality as well as the arrangement and equipment of the catering department in every vessel are regulated by means of laws or regulations.

Article 7(2). Inspection at sea. Further to its previous comment regarding the absence of a written record of inspections carried out at sea, the Committee emphasises that, according to the Convention, there must be a written record of such inspections. The Committee notes that the Government’s report does not provide any indication relating to the measures taken in order to bring the national legislation in line with this Article of the Convention. In addition, the Committee recalls the same requirement has been incorporated in Standard A3.2(7) of the MLC, 2006. Consequently, the Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the results of each inspection carried out at sea by the ship’s master are duly recorded, as required under this Article of the Convention.

Article 10. Annual report. The Committee notes that the Ministry of Labour has envisaged the setting up of a tripartite sectoral committee for the consideration of the situation concerning the implementation of Article 10 of the Convention. It recalls, in this connection, that the Government in earlier reports made reference to a special standing commission responsible for examining and evaluating international labour Conventions on matters relating to seafarers (CECMAL–OIT), but has not given any information on the functioning of such a Committee since 1994. The Committee requests the Government to keep the Office informed of any progress made in this regard, and to transmit a copy of the report on inspections activities as soon as it is drawn up.

Article 11(2). Refresher courses. The Committee notes that the Ministry of Labour has submitted the question of application of Article 11 of the Convention for the consideration by the Directorate General of Ports and Coast Guards. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report concerning the measures adopted to establish refresher courses pursuant to this Article of the Convention.

Article 12. Collection and publication of information. The Committee notes that the Ministry of Labour has envisaged the setting up of a tripartite sectoral committee for the consideration of the situation concerning the implementation of Article 12 of the Convention. It recalls that the same requirements have been incorporated in Guideline B3.2.1(1) and (2) of the MLC, 2006. The Committee requests the Government to keep the Office informed of any measures taken by the competent services to discharge their responsibility for collecting and disseminating up-to-date information on food and catering on board ships and issuing recommendations.

Part V of the report form. Practical application. Noting that the Government has not provided for several years any information of a general nature concerning the application of the Convention in practice, the Committee requests the Government to supply up-to-date information, including, for instance, extracts from reports of the inspection services, any available information as to the number and nature of complaints which may have been made by members of ships’ crew, copies of any applicable collective agreements containing clauses on food and catering, relevant decisions of the Directorate General of Ports and Coast Guards, information on any training courses for members of the catering department of seagoing vessels copies of any notices issued by the competent authority to ships’ masters, stewards or cooks on food and catering issues, including recommendations to avoid wastage of food or to maintain a proper standard of cleanliness.

Finally, the Committee takes this opportunity to recall that most of the provisions of Convention No. 68 have been incorporated into Regulation 3.2, Standard A3.2 and Guideline B3.2.1 of the MLC, 2006. Moreover, the MLC, 2006, introduces some new provisions regarding the obligations to take into account the differing cultural and religious backgrounds, to provide food free of charge and to carry a fully qualified cook on board. The Committee invites the Government to consider the possibility of ratifying the MLC, 2006, in the very near future and to keep the Office informed of any decision taken in this respect.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

Article 4(2) of the Convention. Conditions for granting certificates of qualification for ships’ cooks. Further to its previous comments regarding the absence of any provision establishing the minimum period of service at sea as a precondition for the obtention of a certificate of qualification as ship’s cook, the Committee notes the Government’s reference to the Resolution of the General Directorate of Ports No. 0564-2003-DCG of 10 September 2003. According to the Government’s report, a minimum period of no less than two months of service is generally required for seafarers prior to the issuance of a certificate, in accordance with the Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW). The Committee recalls, however, that the STCW Convention does not contain specific provisions relating to cooks. It also recalls that Decree No. 048-DE/MPG of 9 October 1990 – to which the Government referred in previous reports – does not contain any relevant provisions either. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide additional explanations in this respect and also to transmit a copy of Resolution
No. 0564-2003-DCG.

Article 6. Recognition of certificates. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate whether certificates of qualification issued by other countries were recognized. While noting the Government’s indication that the matter has been referred to the Directorate General of Ports and Coast Guard, the Committee requests the Government to supply more detailed information on this point.

Part V of the report form. Practical application. Noting that the Government has not provided for a number of years general information on the practical application of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to supply up-to-date information in this regard, including, for instance, statistical information on the number of ship’s cook certificates issued during the reporting period, extracts from reports of the inspection services and any difficulties encountered in the application of the Convention.

Finally, the Committee takes this opportunity to recall that the Convention has been revised by the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006), and that its main provisions are now reflected in Regulation 3.2(3), Standard A3.2(3) and (4), and Guideline B3.2.2 of the latter instrument. The Committee therefore invites the Government to consider the possibility of ratifying the MLC, 2006, in the very near future and to keep the Office informed of any decision taken in this respect.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention. Medical examination and right of appeal. The Committee notes that section E-010206 of Supreme Decree No. 028-DE/MGP of 25 May 2001 states that the registration of seafarers must be revalidated every two years, such revalidation being subject to the issue of a medical certificate. The Committee requests the Government to clarify whether the regulations of 29 December 1967 concerning the physical fitness of personnel of the merchant navy, fisheries and maritime services, which refer to the medical examinations required for such personnel and explicitly provide for a right of appeal for any persons denied a medical certificate, as required by Article 8 of the Convention, are still in force. If not, the Government is requested to provide information on the content of medical examinations for seafarers and to indicate the manner in which the right of appeal is ensured.

Part V of the report form. Application in practice. The Committee requests the Government to supply general information on the application of the Convention in practice, including the number of medical certificates issued each year to seafarers and also, if applicable, the number of infringements of the relevant provisions reported by the maritime inspection services and the measures taken to stop such infringements. The Government is also requested to indicate the manner in which the competent national authorities ensure effective monitoring of the practice and quality of medical examinations for non-resident foreign seafarers working on vessels flying the Peruvian flag, particularly when the examination is undertaken in the seafarer’s country of residence or domicile.

Finally, the Committee hopes that the Government will soon be in a position to ratify the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006), which revises Convention No. 73, and 67 other international instruments applicable to seafarers, establishes a comprehensive and up-to-date legislative framework for the regulation of the living and working conditions of seafarers – particularly as regards medical certificates – and promotes the establishment of a level playing field for shipowners. It requests the Government to keep the Office informed of any decisions taken in this respect.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

Article 2(a)(i) of the Convention. Safety standards. Prevention of accidents. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to Supreme Decree No. 028-DE/MGP of 25 May 2001 on regulations on ports and activities at sea and on inland waterways, but observes that this Decree does not provide for the appointment, from amongst the crew of the ship, of a suitable person or persons or of a suitable committee, responsible under the master for accident prevention. It recalls that a similar requirement for the designation of a ship’s safety committee with the participation of seafarers’ representatives has been included in Standard A4.3(2)(d) of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006). The Committee therefore again requests the Government to indicate how substantial equivalence is ensured with the requirement of Article 7 of the Prevention of Accidents (Seafarers) Convention, 1970 (No. 134).

Article 2(a)(iii). Shipboard living arrangements. Crew accommodation. The Committee recalls its previous comment in which it noted that, in view of their limited content, Supreme Decree No. 028-DE/MPG and Resolution No. 562‑2003/DGG could not be considered as being substantially equivalent to the detailed provisions of the Accommodation of Crews Convention (Revised), 1949 (No. 92). It also recalls that similar requirements have been incorporated in Regulation 3.1 and the corresponding Code of the MLC, 2006. The Committee therefore requests once more the Government to consider appropriate action to ensure that national laws or regulations contain provisions substantially equivalent to the standards set out in Convention No. 92 with regard to the following crew accommodation requirements: Article 7(1) (adequate ventilation of sleeping and mess-rooms); Article 8(1) (adequate heating system); Article 9(2) (adequate lighting); Article 10(1) (situation of sleeping rooms the load line amidships or aft); Article 13 (sufficient sanitary accommodation, ventilated and with adequate soil and waste pipes); Article 14(1) (separate hospital accommodation); and Article 17 (inspection of crew accommodation by the ship’s master and crew members at least once a week).

Article 2(b). Exercise of effective jurisdiction and control. The Committee requests the Government to provide more detailed information on the manner in which the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion discharges its responsibility to effectively control ships flying the national flag to ensure compliance with national laws and regulations pertaining to social security, seafarers’ conditions of employment and shipboard living arrangements.

Article 2(f). Flag State inspections. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the competent authority for exercising control over safety standards on board merchant ships is the Directorate General of Ports and Cost Guards. The Committee requests the Government to provide more detailed information on the functioning of the system of ship inspection, for example, the number and powers of inspectors, the frequency of inspections, statistics on inspection results and any action taken, and the number and nature of any complaints received.

Article 2(g). Inquiries into serious marine casualties. The Committee once more requests the Government to indicate how it is ensured that an official inquiry is held into a serious marine casualty leading to injury or loss of life that involves a ship flying the Peruvian flag – irrespective of any notification or request of the ship’s master, shipowner, agent or operator, as required by this Article of the Convention. In addition, the Committee recalls that the same requirement has been incorporated in Regulation 5.1.6(1) of the MLC, 2006.

Article 4. Port State control. Further to its previous comment, the Committee requests the Government to specify how it is ensured in law and practice that, for the purposes of exercising port State control activities, complaints may be submitted by a member of the crew, a professional body, an association or a trade union, and also that complaints other than in writing may be investigated. The Committee recalls that the same requirements have been incorporated in Standard A5.2.1(1)(d) and (4) of the MLC, 2006.

Part IV of the report form. Practical application. The Committee notes the statistical information provided by the Government concerning the number of seafarers and the number of complaints received by the Port Authority. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide up-to-date information on the practical application of the Convention, including for instance, the number of seafarers covered by the relevant legislation, statistics on flag State and port State inspections, the number and nature of any complaints considered and the action taken, copies of any standardized inspection checklist or inspection report form and official publications.

Finally, the Committee recalls that Convention No. 147, together with 67 other international maritime labour instruments, is revised by the MLC, 2006. The Committee accordingly hopes that, when considering appropriate measures to bring the national legislation into line with Convention No. 147, the Government will also take due account of the corresponding requirements of the MLC, 2006. The Committee requests the Government to keep the Office informed of any decision taken or envisaged with respect to the early ratification and effective implementation of the MLC, 2006.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

Article 1(7)(e). Scope of inspection. The Committee notes that, under section C-010701 of Decree No. 028-DE-MGP of 25 May 2001 approving the Regulations on Ports and Activities at Sea and on Inland Waterways, flag State inspections are intended to control conditions of hygiene and cleanliness as well as food and catering services on board ships. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether and how other aspects, such as minimum age, articles of agreement, crew accommodation, recruitment, manning, qualifications, hours of work, medical certificates, prevention of occupational accidents, medical care, sickness and injury benefits, social welfare, and repatriation, which also make up part of the seafarers’ working and living conditions, are being regularly inspected.

Article 3(1). Periodic review of registered ships. In the absence of any information on this point, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate whether all Peruvian-flagged vessels above 500 GT are inspected at intervals not exceeding three years and, if so, to specify the relevant legal provision. It recalls that the same requirement has been incorporated in Standard A5.1.4(4) of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006).

Article 3(3). Inspection in case of substantial changes. The Committee renews its request for the Government to indicate whether, in cases of substantial changes in construction or accommodation arrangements, ships are inspected within three months of the completion of such changes. It recalls that a similar provision has been incorporated in Standard A5.1.3(14) and (15) of the MLC, 2006.

Article 4. Qualification of inspectors. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate whether specialized inspection units have been established or envisaged for the maritime sector. If not, please indicate by what other means it is ensured that general labour inspectors have appropriate qualifications to guarantee that due regard is being given to the specificities of the maritime sector. It recalls that similar provisions have been incorporated in Standard A5.1.4(2) and (3) of the MLC, 2006.

Article 6(2). Compensation for unreasonable detention or delay. The Committee requests the Government to indicate by what means it is ensured that, if a ship undergoing an inspection is unreasonably detained or delayed, the shipowner or operator of the ship is entitled to compensation for any loss or damage suffered. It recalls that the same principle has been incorporated in Standard A5.1.4(16) of the MLC, 2006.

Article 9(1). Inspector’s report. The Committee once more requests the Government to indicate by what means it is ensured that, in case of ship inspections, one copy of the inspection report is communicated to the master of the ship, and another copy is posted on the ship’s noticeboard for the information of the seafarers. It recalls that the same requirement has been incorporated in Standard A5.1.4(12) and Guideline B5.1.4(8)(d) of the MLC, 2006.

Article 9(2). Inspection pursuant to a major incident. The Committee requests the Government to specify how it is ensured that, in case of a ship inspection pursuant to a major incident, the inspection report is prepared as soon as practicable, but not later than one month following the conclusion of the inspection.

Part V of the report form. Practical application. The Committee requests the Government to provide a general appreciation of the manner in which the Convention is applied in practice, including, for instance, extracts from inspections reports and the number of seafarers and ships covered by the measures giving effect to the Convention.

Finally, the Committee takes this opportunity to recall that most of the provisions of Convention No. 178 have been incorporated in Regulations 5.1.1 and 5.1.4 and the corresponding Code of the MLC, 2006, and therefore ensuring compliance with Convention No. 178 would facilitate compliance with the respective provisions of the MLC, 2006. It also recalls the adoption by an ILO tripartite experts’ meeting in September 2008 of the Guidelines for flag State inspections under the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 as an essential aspect of ensuring widespread harmonized implementation of the MLC, 2006. The Committee requests the Government to keep the Office informed of any further developments regarding the process of ratification and effective implementation of the MLC, 2006.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

Article 1, paragraphs 1–4, of the Convention. Scope of application. According to section 4 of the General Act No. 28806 of 19 July 2006 on Labour Inspection (Labour Inspection Act), labour inspections may take place in all workplaces, including on merchant shipping vessels and fishing vessels, regardless of the flag they fly; tugs do not appear to be excluded. The Government indicates that, at national level, the criteria for the application of the Convention have not yet been established. After consultations with the Regional Directorates for Labour and Employment Promotion (DRTPEs) as to which ships are to be regarded as seagoing ships, replies have been received from two Directorates. The DRTPE Moquegua considers as seagoing ships all vessels engaged in the transport of passengers or cargo or other maritime commercial operations, high-sea tugs, and fishing vessels of more than 500 gross tonnage (gt) falling under the labour regime of private activity. The DRTPE Piura considers as seagoing ships all vessels of more than 372 gt navigating in maritime areas of operation, and does not exclude tugs.

Article 1, paragraph 2, requires that national laws or regulations shall determine which ships are to be regarded as seagoing ships. Given that there are 24 different DRTPEs, it is indispensable that the question be dealt with uniformly. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the determination which ships are to be regarded as seagoing ships (including tugs), is made at national level by means of national laws or regulations, and to indicate in its next report which ships are regarded in Peru as seagoing for the purposes of this Convention.

Furthermore, according to Article 1, paragraph 4, the Convention does not apply to vessels less than 500 gt and, when not engaged in navigation, to vessels such as oil rigs and drilling platforms. The Convention requires that the decision as to which vessels are covered by this paragraph be taken by the central coordinating authority in consultation with the most representative organizations of shipowners and seafarers. In view of the size limitations established by two DRTPEs, the Committee asks the Government to indicate the consultations which have been held or will be held on the scope of application, in conformity with this paragraph.

Article 1, paragraph 5. Application to fishing. Under section 4 of the Labour Inspection Act, all merchant shipping vessels and fishing vessels, regardless of their size and flag, fall under the Act. According to the DRTPE Moquegua, the Convention shall apply to fishing vessels of more than 500 gt engaged in commercial maritime fishing and undertaking voyages of at least one week. The DRTPE Piura considers that the Convention covers all vessels engaged in commercial maritime fishing, insofar as safety and health and habitability are concerned. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on any consultations held or planned on the coverage of fishing vessels by DRTPE Moquegua and DRTPE Piura as well as any other DRTPEs, in conformity with this paragraph.

Article 1, paragraph 7(e). Scope of inspection. Sections 1 and 3(1) of the Labour Inspection Act and section 2 of the Supreme Decree No. 019-2006-TR of 28 October 2006 approving the Regulation implementing the Labour Inspection Act (Labour Inspection Regulation) enumerate the subject-matters to be inspected by labour inspectors. Since these generic pieces of legislation are applicable to all workers, items specific to the maritime sector are not listed. The Committee requests the Government to indicate by what means it is ensured that the following conditions specific to the maritime sector fall within the remit of labour inspection on board ships:

–           the standards of maintenance and cleanliness of shipboard living and working areas, minimum age, articles of agreement, food and catering, crew accommodation, recruitment, manning, qualifications, hours of work, medical examinations, prevention of occupational accidents, medical care, sickness and injury benefits, social welfare and related matters, repatriation, terms and conditions of employment which are subject to national laws and regulations, and freedom of association as defined in the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), of the International Labour Organization.

Article 2, paragraph 3. Recognized organizations. The report contains no information as to whether the central coordinating authority has recognized any public institutions or other organizations as competent to carry out inspections. The Committee asks the Government to indicate whether public institutions or other organizations are recognized as competent to carry out inspections of seafarers’ living and working conditions. Please provide details on the basis on which such recognition is granted, and supply a copy of any list maintained and published in this respect.

Article 3, paragraph 1. Periodic inspection of all ships registered in Peru. Sections 10 and 12 of the Labour Inspection Act enumerate the factors triggering inspection activities. It remains unclear, however, whether all ships registered in Peru are being inspected or only a sample of vessels. Also, there is no information on the intervals at which inspections are carried out. The Committee requests the Government to provide information as to whether each and every ship registered in Peru is being inspected, and whether such inspection takes place at intervals not exceeding three years or, when practicable, annually.

Article 3, paragraph 3. Inspection in case of substantial changes. Neither the Labour Inspection Act nor the Government’s report contains information on the issue. The Committee asks the Government to indicate whether, in cases of substantial changes in construction or accommodation arrangements, ships are inspected within three months of such changes.

Article 4. Qualification of inspectors. Sections 26, paragraph 1(a), and 27 of the Labour Inspection Act list the qualifications required to carry out labour inspection, and provide for training and ongoing training. Under section 19(4), specialized inspection units and teams may be established, for example according to the sector of economic activity. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether such specialized inspection units have been established or are envisaged for the maritime sector. If not, please indicate by what other means it is ensured that general labour inspectors have appropriate qualifications to guarantee that due regard is being given to the specificities of the maritime sector.

Article 6, paragraph 2. Compensation for unreasonable detention or delay. Section 21.6 of the Labour Inspection Regulation contains the right of the employer to challenge the order of prohibition or stop of work at the workplace. No information is, however, provided regarding compensation to be granted for loss or damage suffered in case of undue prohibition or stop of work at the workplace. The Committee asks the Government: (i) to indicate by what means it is ensured that, if a ship is unreasonably detained or delayed, the shipowner or operator of the ship is entitled to compensation for any loss or damage suffered; and (ii) to provide information on any cases in practice where the shipowner or operator of the ship was entitled to compensation.

Article 9, paragraph 1. Inspector’s report of inspection. According to section 13 of the Labour Inspection Act and section 17 of the Labour Inspection Regulation, the labour inspector shall draw up a written report concerning each inspection activity carried out and the results achieved. The Committee requests the Government to indicate by what means it is ensured that, in case of ship inspections, one copy of the inspection report in English or in the working language of the ship shall be furnished to the master of the ship, and another copy shall be posted on the ship's notice board for the information of the seafarers or sent to their representatives.

Article 9, paragraph 2. Inspector’s report of inspection pursuant to major incident. In the absence of relevant information, the Committee asks the Government to specify how it is ensured that, in case of a ship inspection pursuant to a major incident, the inspection report shall be submitted as soon as practicable but not later than one month following the conclusion of the inspection.

Part IV of the report form. Court decisions. Please indicate whether courts of law or other tribunals have given decisions involving questions of principle relating to the application of the Convention, and, if so, supply the text of these decisions.

Part V. Application in practice. The Committee asks the Government to give a general appreciation of the manner in which the Convention is applied in Peru in practice. In particular, please supply extracts from reports of inspections on board ships, and information on the number of seafarers covered by the measures giving effect to the Convention and the number and nature of infringements reported and sanctions imposed in the shipping sector.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee notes the Government’s first report. It draws the Government’s attention to the following points.

Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Convention. Seagoing ships. The national legislation classifies ships according to their zone of activity. Accordingly, seagoing ships are ships which are active in the maritime zone. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether publicly owned ships employed for commercial purposes which are active in the maritime zone are also regarded as seagoing ships and are consequently subject to the application of the provisions of the Convention.

Article 1, paragraph 4. Small vessels. The Committee requests the Government to indicate any decisions taken by the competent authority, in consultation with the most representative organizations of shipowners and seafarers, to exclude small vessels from the scope of the Convention.

Article 2(a)(i). Safety standards. Hours of work. Peru has not ratified the Seafarers’ Hours of Work and the Manning of Ships Convention, 1996 (No. 180). Supreme Decree No. 028-DE/MPG of 25 May 2001 does not contain provisions on this subject and the Government has not provided information in its report. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the manner in which the hours of work of seafarers are regulated.

Article 2(a). (Conventions referred to in the Appendix to Convention No. 147, but not ratified by Peru).

–      Convention No. 92. In accordance with paragraphs 120, 174 and 175 of the General Survey by the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations “Labour standards on merchant ships”, 1990, “the substantive safety standards in Convention No. 92 seem to include those requiring adequate security, protection against weather an insulation in respect of the location, means of access, structure and arrangement in relation to other spaces of crew accommodation, having regard, amongst other things, fire prevention needs (Article 6(1) and (8)); adequate ventilation of sleeping and mess-rooms (Article 7(1)); an adequate system of heating, avoiding the risk of fire or other danger (Article 8(1) and (6)); adequate lighting (Article 9(2)); the normal situation of sleeping rooms amidships or aft above the load line (Article 10(1)); sufficient sanitary accommodation, ventilated and with adequate disposal pipes (Article 13(1), (8) and (10)); an approved medicine chest and, where a crew of 15 or more is carried, separate hospital accommodation (Article 14(1) and (7)). It may be considered that in order to ‘ensure the safety of life on board ship’ further requirements should also be included. The measures laid down in Convention No. 92 to ensure the implementation of those standards are of the kind laid down also in Convention No. 147, especially the enactment of legislation on substantive questions and consultation of shipowners and seafarers in the framing and administration of them (Article 3(2)(e)); and inspection of crew accommodation by the competent authority on registration or re-registration of the ship and when a complaint is received (Article 5) and by the responsible officer and crew members at least once a week (Article 17). In addition, Convention No. 92 provides for the approval of plans in advance (Article 4), as well as detailed requirements relating to the construction, equipment, decoration and furnishing of all aspects of crew accommodation and recreation space”.

Supreme Decree No. 028-DE/MPG only contains general provisions respecting prior approval of plans of ships under construction. With regard to crew accommodation, section 13.1.1 of the resolution of the Directorate No. 562-2003/DCG of 5 September 2003 approving the Code for the Safety of Equipment for Ships and Naval, Maritime, River and Lake Vessels provides that, according to the number of the passengers and crew members, maritime ships and vessels shall provide for each berth a mattress or covering (colchoneta), a pillow, two fitted sheets, two pillow covers and, where appropriate, two blankets. Ships shall also carry a gas cooker (section 13.1.2) and a set of kitchen utensils (section 13.1.3) and each crew member shall have the right to a flat plate, a deep plate, a cup and a set of cutlery (section 13.1.4). The text provides that berths shall be clean and of appropriate dimensions to allow the crew member or passenger to “stretch out in full”. The Resolution also contains provisions on the insulation of mess rooms (in the context of fire prevention), and also provides that an emergency medicine chest shall be carried on board.

In view of their limited content, the provisions of the national legislation cannot be considered as being substantially equivalent to the provisions of Convention No. 92. The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend the national legislation so as to bring it into substantial equivalence with the provisions of this Convention, and, in particular, to provide for: detailed requirements respecting the construction, equipment, decoration and furnishing of crew accommodation; recreation spaces, as well as adequate ventilation of sleeping and mess-rooms (Article 7, paragraph 1); an adequate heating system, placed so as to avoid the risk of fire or other danger (Article 8, paragraphs 1 and 6); adequate lighting (Article 9, paragraph 2); the normal situation of sleeping rooms amidships or aft above the load line (Article 10, paragraph 1); sufficient sanitary accommodation, ventilated and with adequate soil and waste pipes (Article 13, paragraphs 1, 8 and 10); separate hospital accommodation (Article 14, paragraph 1); the requirement to consult shipowners and seafarers in the framing and administration of such legislation (Article 3, paragraph 2(e)); and inspection of crew accommodation by the responsible officer and crew members at least once a week (Article 17).

Convention No. 134. In paragraph 107 of the above General Survey, the Committee considers that one of the essential features of Article 2(a) of Convention No. 147, in relation to Convention No. 134, is the requirement that “one or more crew members should be appointed as responsible for accident prevention under Article 7”. As the national legislation does not appear to give effect to this provision, the Committee requests the Government to adopt measures for the appointment, from among the crew of the ship, of a suitable person or suitable persons or of a suitable committee responsible, under the Master, for accident prevention.

Article 2(b). Control over standards other than safety standards. The inspections enumerated in section VII of Supreme Decree No. 028-DE/MPG relate essentially to safety. The Committee consequently requests the Government to indicate the manner in which control is organized of standards other than safety standards, as enumerated in this provision of the Convention, and the authority competent for exercising such control.

Article 2(c). Living conditions and arrangements. Existence of collective agreements. In view of the absence of information in the report, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether collective agreements on living conditions and arrangements have been concluded and, if so, requests it to provide detailed information on the measures agreed between shipowners or their organizations and seafarers’ organizations for the effective control of these agreements where the Government has no effective jurisdiction.

Article 2, subparagraph (d)(i). Application of the procedure for the investigation of complaints relating to non-military ships. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the single Text of the Administrative Procedure for Warships (TUPAM 15001), which establishes arrangements for the investigation of complaints by the maritime authority, is applicable to non-military ships.

Article 2, subparagraph (d)(ii). Reporting of complaints made in connection with the recruitment in Peru of seafarers on ships registered in a foreign country. The Government indicates that there is no specific procedure for the reporting of such complaints to the competent authority in the country concerned. In practice, a direct communication is forwarded to the maritime administration of the country in which the ship is registered requesting information or suitable action to resolve the problem that gave rise to the complaint. However, under the terms of the Convention, the Member is under the obligation to ensure that adequate procedures, subject to overall supervision by the competent authority, exist for the investigation of any complaint made in connection with the engagement in Peru of seafarers on ships registered in a foreign country to be “promptly reported … to the competent authority of the country in which the ship is registered, with a copy to the Director-General of the International Labour Office”. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that such complaints are reported to the competent authority of the country in which the ship is registered, with a copy to the Director-General of the International Labour Office.

Article 2, subparagraph (f). Inspection services. The Government indicates that there is no specific system to verify compliance with the various provisions of the Convention. The maritime authority controls the application of all the standards in force in the maritime sector and penalizes any violations which may be detected. The Committee requests the Government to describe the inspection or other arrangements which exist to verify compliance with the various standards mentioned in this paragraph and to give details of the functioning of these arrangements (for example: size of inspection staff, numbers and results of inspections, and investigations of complaints, penalties imposed).

Article 2, subparagraph (g). Inquiries into any serious marine accidents. Section A‑030204 of Supreme Decree No. 028-DE/MPG provides that the Master, the maritime agent, the shipowner or any person concerned shall be required to notify the port authority of any accident, breakdown or death occurring on board the ship. Under the terms of section A-030205, for an inquiry to be conducted, the port authority must however have received an explicit request in the notification. In contrast, the Convention establishes the requirement that an official inquiry shall be held “into any serious marine casualty” involving ships registered in the territory of the Member and that the final report of such inquiry is to be made public. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take measures to ensure that an official inquiry is held into any serious marine casualty involving Peruvian ships, particularly those involving injury and/or loss of life, with the final report of such inquiry normally to be made public, even where a formal request to this effect has not been made in the notification of the accident made under the terms of Supreme Decree No. 028-DE/MPG.

Article 3. Advice to Peruvian seafarers engaged on board foreign ships. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures adopted to advise, in so far as practical, its nationals on the possible problems of signing on a ship registered in a State which has not ratified the present Convention.

Article 4, paragraph 3. Complaints. Sections A-030201 to A-030206 of Supreme Decree No. 028-DE/MPG relate to complaints. A complaint is a document by means of which the Master, the shipowner, the maritime agent, the operator of the ship or any person having a legitimate interest notifies in writing the port authority of the occurrence of an infringement of Supreme Decree No. 028‑DE/MPG or of provisions respecting nautical activities. The requirement to make a complain in writing goes beyond the provisions of the Convention, which does not define the manner in which the complaint shall be made. The Convention also provides that the complaint may be submitted by a member of the crew, a professional body, an association or a trade union, whereas the national legislation only refers to “any person having a legitimate interest”. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate what is meant in the national legislation by the term “any person having a legitimate interest” and, in particular, to specify whether a member of the crew, a professional body, an association or a trade union may submit a complaint. It also requests the Government to take measures to ensure that the complaint may be submitted orally or in writing.

Part III of the report form. Decisions involving questions of principle. The Committee requests the Government to state whether courts of law or other tribunals have given decisions involving questions of principles relating to the application of the Convention and, if so, requests it to supply the texts of these decisions.

Part IV of the report form and Article 4, paragraph 3. Information on the application of the Convention in practice. The Committee requests the Government to give a general appreciation of the manner in which the Convention is applied including, for instance, extracts from the reports of the authority or authorities responsible for the application of the Convention, information on the number of seafarers covered by these provisions, the number of complaints made, the measures adopted, etc.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes the adoption of Supreme Decree No. 028-DE/MPG of 25 May 2001, issuing regulations under the Act on the control and surveillance of maritime, river and lake transport, and repealing Supreme Decree No. 002-87-MA of 9 April 1987. It draws the Government’s attention to the following points.

Article 4, paragraph 2, of the Convention. Conditions for granting a certificate of qualification as ship’s cook. The Committee notes that Supreme Decree No. 028-DE/MPG of 25 May 2001, in contrast to Supreme Decree No. 002-87-MA of 9 April 1987, which it repeals, does not contain specific provisions relating to cooks. The conditions for obtaining a certificate of qualification as a ship’s cook are now only governed in the national legislation by Supreme Decree No. 048-DE/MPG of 9 October 1990 on ships’ cooks. Sections 1 and 2 of this Decree establish the requirements concerning age and nationality. Section 5 specifies the types of documents which have to be presented by the seafarer, in addition to obtaining a certificate of vocational qualification, to be registered and issued with a seafarer’s book. In addition, the seafarer has to provide a certificate of physical fitness issued by the Naval Medical Centre and a certificate from the National Merchant Naval School “Amiral Miguel Grau” confirming attendance and the award of a diploma for the completion of the training course as a crew member in the merchant navy. Once all these steps have been completed, the seafarer will receive, with the agreement of the captain of the port, authorization granting a certificate as ship’s cook enabling him to work in the merchant navy (section 6). Such approval may be withdrawn in cases where, within the first three years of obtaining the approval, the seafarer has not sailed for at least eight months on a ship to carry out his occupation (section 13). The Committee recalls that, under the terms of Article 4, paragraph 2, of the Convention, “no person shall be granted a certificate of qualification unless: (a) he has reached a minimum age to be prescribed by the competent authority; (b) he has served at sea for a minimum period to be prescribed by the competent authority; and (c) he has passed an examination to be prescribed by the competent authority”. Admittedly, the national legislation has recourse to the concept of a minimum period of service on board to determine whether or not the seafarer retains the authorization, but it does not contain a provision concerning the minimum period at sea to be prescribed to obtain the certificate itself. The seafarer receives authorization, and therefore the certificate, and it is only subsequently that the document may be withdrawn if the seafarer does not complete a minimum period of service at sea. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to bring national law and practice into conformity with these provisions and to ensure that a minimum period of sea service is required, in order to obtain the certificate as a ship’s cook.

Article 6. Recognition of certificates. The Government indicates in its report that it applies the procedure for the recognition of certificates set out in Regulation I/10 of the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW), as amended. However, the STCW does not contain specific provisions relating to cooks. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the manner in which foreign certificates of qualification for ships’ cooks are recognized.

Part V of the report form. The Committee notes with regret that the report does not contain any information on this point. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to provide a general appreciation of the manner in which the Convention is applied including, for instance, extracts from the reports of the inspection services and indications on the number of certificates issued.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government. It wishes to draw the Government’s attention to the following points.

In answer to the comments made in 2001 by the Union of Crew Members of Maritime Vessels for the Protection of CPVSA Workers alleging non-compliance with the provisions of the Convention by Peru, the Government indicates that whenever a problem arises concerning the application of the Convention, suitable remedial measures are taken in accordance with the law; and it therefore considers that the abovementioned comments are unfounded. The Government states that it is nevertheless ready to respond to any requests for information from the Committee. According to the information supplied in the Government’s report, no texts have been enacted recently on food and catering for ships’ crews. The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report the suitable measures to which it refers, and to indicate in particular the manner in which it has resolved the problem raised by the abovementioned union.

Article 2, paragraph 2, and Article 12 of the Convention. Research into and educational information on food supply and catering. A study on the diet of crew members was conducted in 1984 by the Naval Medical Centre. The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report whether other studies, inter alia, on methods of ensuring a proper food supply and catering service, have been conducted in recent years. It also asks the Government to indicate whether recent information on new methods for the purchasing, storing and preservation of food and for waste control have been collected and disseminated in accordance with Article 12 of the Convention.

Article 3. Cooperation with organizations of shipowners and seafarers and with national authorities. According to this provision, the competent authority must carry out its work in close cooperation with the organizations of shipowners and seafarers and with national or local authorities concerned with questions of food and health. In this provision, the authority’s work is to be construed broadly. Amongst other things it involves setting up both national regulations and an inspection system. The national legislation only provides, in section 33 of Legislative Decree No. 910 of 16 March 2001 on labour inspection and the protection of workers, for the signing of cooperation agreements regarding inspection with public entities or bodies and with organizations of employers and workers. Consequently, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the competent authority also cooperates with these entities on matters pertaining to the regulation of food and catering for crews.

Article 5, paragraph 2. Requirement for the provision of suitable food and water supplies. Although sections A-070101 to A-070103 of Supreme Decree No. 047-DE/MGP of 9 October 1990 on food and catering for merchant crews contain, as required by Article 5, paragraph 2(a), of the Convention, provisions on the nutritive value and variety of food, there is no indication as to the quantity and quality of the food. Section E-010705 of Supreme Decree No. 002-87-MA of 9 April 1987 stipulates only that pilots are required to give the ship’s master confirmation that supplies are adequate for the voyage planned. Consequently, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the manner in which the requisite quantity of food is calculated. It also asks the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that provisions governing both the quantity and the quality of food are incorporated in the legislation.

Article 7, paragraph 2. Inspection at sea. According to section A-080104 of Supreme Decree No. 047-DE/MGP of 9 October 1990 on food and catering for crews on merchant ships, the chief pilot is responsible for carrying out a daily inspection in addition to the annual inspection performed by the maritime authority. According to section A-080105, however, only the results of the maritime authority’s inspections are recorded. The Committee points out that, according to the Convention, there must be a written record of the results of each inspection at sea. The Committee therefore asks the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that the results of each inspection carried out at sea by the ship’s master or an officer are recorded as required by the Convention.

Article 10. Preparation of an annual report. For many years the Committee has been asking the Government to provide the annual report prepared by the competent authority. The Government again indicates that such a report has still not been prepared. It states, however, that the Directorate General of Harbour Offices and Coastguards has sent the model on which the Government plans to base the report; this model being appended to the report. Since the Committee has not received the model, it requests the Government to send it with its next report. It hopes that the Government will be in a position to send the report required by the Convention as soon as possible.

Article 11, paragraph 2. Refresher courses. Sections A-010102 and A-010107 of Supreme Decree No. 047-DE/MGP of 9 October 1990 on food and catering for merchant crews set forth the requirements and qualifications demanded of staff responsible for food. According to the provisions of the Convention, refresher courses, enabling persons already trained to bring their knowledge and skill up to date must be provided. Since the national legislation contains no provisions of this kind, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary steps to establish such courses.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report does not contain information on a point raised in its previous comment. It is therefore bound to repeat its direct request on this point, which read as follows:

Article 8 of the Convention. Re-examination following refusal of a medical certificate. The Committee notes that under section 105 of the Regulations on the physical capacity of the personnel of the merchant navy, fishery and maritime services, a person who has been denied a certificate of fitness after having being examined may request another examination indicating the reasons for such request. Such second examination shall be conducted by persons different from those who conducted the first examination. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply information on the practical application of this provision and indicate how it is ensured that the persons conducting further examinations are independent of any shipowner or of any organization of shipowners or seafarers.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

In its previous direct request the Committee asked the Government to provide the reply to the comments of the Union of Crew Members of Maritime Vessels for the Protection of C.P.V.S.A. Workers concerning the alleged non-observance by Peru of the Convention, previously transmitted to the Government for response. It notes that the Government’s report does not reply to these comments. The Committee once again asks the Government to provide its reply to these comments.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

The Committee notes the comments of the Union of Crew Members of Maritime Vessels for the Protection of CPVSA Workers concerning the alleged non-observance by Peru of the Convention, previously transmitted to the Government for response. Referring also to its 1998 direct request the Committee asks the Government to provide its reply to these comments.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

Article 8 of the Convention. The Committee notes that under article 105 of the Regulations concerning physical capacity of the personnel of the merchant marine, fishery and maritime services, the person who has been denied a certificate of fitness after having being examined may request another examination indicating the reasons for such request. Such second examination shall be conducted by persons different from those who conducted the first examination. The Committee would be grateful if the Government could supply information on the practical application of this provision as well as to indicate how it is assured that the persons conducting further examinations are independent of any shipowner or of any organization of shipowners or seafarers.

Referring to its 1999 general observation, the Committee asks the Government to provide information concerning the manner in which the competent authority ensures effective supervision of both the quality and the reality of the medical examination for non-resident, foreign seafarers, in particular when the examination is carried out in the seafarer’s country of residence or domicile.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

Article 3 of the Convention. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government concerning the special standing commission set up by Ministerial Resolution No. 060-96-PCM. The Committee notes that this commission is responsible for advising on the signing, accession to and ratification of international conventions. Its terms of reference do not appear to cover the requirement of Article 3 of the Convention, which concerns cooperation between the competent authority and the organizations of shipowners and seafarers and the coordination of different authorities in relation to aspects covered by the Convention once it has been ratified. The Committee hopes that the Government will provide information in its next report on the manner in which such collaboration and coordination is ensured.

Article 9, paragraph 2. The Committee notes the information in the Government's last report concerning the scope of Ministerial Resolution 0726-92-SA/DM and section 83, subparagraph (f), of the General Customs Duties Act. The Committee notes that the content of the Act in question bears no relation to the provisions of this Article of the Convention. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate if it has adopted legislation providing for specific penalties for the infringements referred to in this provision of the Convention, and, if it has done so, to provide the Office with a copy of the relevant text.

Article 10. The Committee notes that the General Directorate of Harbours and Coastguards of the Peruvian Navy is in the process of drawing up its annual report. The Committee hopes that this report will be published once it is completed and made available to organizations and persons who may be interested and that a copy will be provided for the ILO.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

Point V of the report form. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided in the Government's report covering the period 1991-96 in relation to the issuing of certificates of qualification and cook's duties as prescribed by legislation. The Committee again requests the Government to provide information or official reports in order to evaluate the manner in which the Convention is applied in practice (inspection reports, the number of certificates issued, etc.).

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest the information supplied by the Government in its report. The Committee requests the Government to supply additional information on the following points.

Article 3 of the Convention. In its report in 1990, the Government referred to the existence of a special standing commission which is responsible for examining and evaluating international labour Conventions and Recommendations on matters relating to the work of seafarers (CECMAL-OIT), in cooperation with shipowners and seafarers. In its latest report, the Government no longer refers to the special commission nor supplies any other information relating to the application of this Article of the Convention concerning cooperation with the organizations of shipowners and seafarers and with the various authorities concerned, apart from indicating that this provision is still not applied. Please clarify this point.

Article 9, paragraph 2. The Committee notes the information that the new national legislation is still being formulated with regard to specific penalties for the violations referred to by this provision of the Convention. The Government is asked to state whether this legislation has been adopted and, if so, to supply a copy of it.

Article 10. Please provide an copy of the most recent annual report published by the competent authority.

Point V of the report form. Please supply general information on the manner in which the Convention is applied, including, for example, copies of collective agreements relating to food and the catering service on board vessels.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

The Committee notes the communication of the Trade Union of Crews of Petroleum Transoceanica S.A. in which the Union states that section 070105 of the Regulations concerning food and catering on board ship, approved by Supreme Decree No. 047 DE/MGP of 1990, provides a cash equivalent of the food ration for crew who have, for any reason, to feed themselves ashore which is inferior to the protection required under the Convention. In its view the Convention is binding and under article 57 of the Peruvian Constitution cannot be renounced, so that all contrary provisions or agreements such as sections 070105 and 070106 of the above Regulations are void. It adds that in cases of any doubts as to the scope and contents of any such provisions the interpretation should be in favour of workers. The Government has replied that the provisions in question do not relate to the obligation in respect of food and catering on board ship, which is fulfilled by the company. The Committee recalls that the Convention requires the promotion by the ILO member State for which it is in force of a proper standard of food and catering for the crews of vessels (Article 1(1)). Legislation on food and catering arrangements should be designed to secure the health and well-being of crews, with food and water supplies which are suitable in respect of quantity, nutritive value, quality and variety (Article 5). The Committee notes also that the competent authority should work in close cooperation with the organizations of shipowners and seafarers in regard to these matters (Article 3). It would be grateful if in its next report the Government would indicate the nature of the difficulties met with and the results of any consultations undertaken. Please also indicate what steps might be taken in this light.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

The Committee notes the communication of the Trade Union of Crews of Petroleum Transoceanica S.A. in which the Union states that Supreme Decree No. 047 DE/MGP of 1990 concerning food and catering on board ship provides a cash equivalent of the food ration for crew who have, for any reason, to feed themselves ashore which is inferior to the protection required under the Convention. In its view the Convention is binding and under article 57 of the Peruvian Constitution cannot be renounced, so that all contrary provisions or agreements such as sections 07105 and 07106 of the Decree are void. It adds that in cases of any doubts as to the scope and contents of any such provisions the interpretation should be in favour of workers.

The Government has replied that the provisions in question do not relate to the obligation in respect of food and catering on board ship, which is fulfilled by the company.

The Committee notes that the Convention requires the promotion by the ILO member State for which it is in force of a proper standard of food and catering for the crews of vessels (Article 1(1)). Legislation on food and catering arrangements should be designed to secure the health and well-being of crews, with food and water supplies which are suitable in respect of quantity, nutritive value, quality and variety (Article 5). The Committee notes also that the competent authority should work in close cooperation with the organisations of shipowners and seafarers in regard to these matters (Article 3). It would be grateful if in its next report the Government would indicate the nature of the difficulties met with and the results of any consultations undertaken. Please also indicate what steps might be taken in this light.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

The Committee notes with satisfaction the adoption of the Supreme Decree No. 048-90-DE/MGP of 9 October 1990 approving the Regulations on Ships' Cooks which meet the requirements of Article 4 of the Convention. It hopes that in future reports the Government will include available information on the practical application of the Regulations (Part V of the report form).

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

Further to its observation and its previous direct request, the Committee has noted with interest the indications as to co-ordination and co-operation between the various authorities and shipowners' and seafarers' organisations in relation to the Convention (Article 3), with a view to, amongst other things, new regulations relating to the Convention. It hopes such regulations will take account of the following matters and that the Government will supply full details.

Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government's statement that inspectors are duly qualified. Please give particulars of their qualifications, as requested in the report form approved by the Governing Body.

Article 5(2)(a). The Committee notes that Supreme Decree No. 012-77-SA contains no requirement as to the nutritive value and variety of food and water supplies. Please indicate any measures proposed in this respect. Please also supply a copy of any legislation relating to the registers referred to in the report as specifying the quantities of provisions on board each ship or a model register.

Articles 6, 9 and 10 (and Parts III and V of the report form). The Committee notes from the report that there are annual inspections of the catering department, including the registers which indicate the quantities of food which should be on board. It hopes that the Government will supply copies of the annual inspection reports, which it indicates are being processed, together with information on the powers of inspectors to make recommendations to shipowners and on the practical working of inspection, as requested in the report form.

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

The Committee refers to its observation concerning the draft regulation relating to the certification of ships' cooks, the text of which the Government appended to its 1983 report.

The Committee notes that this draft does not contain any provisions prescribing a minimum period of service at sea, as required by Article 4, paragraph 2(b), of the Convention. Moreover, the draft does not give full effect to paragraphs 2(c), 3 and 4 of Article 4, which provide that examinations prescribed or controlled by the competent authority should include certain specific tests. The Committee would be much obliged to the Government if it would indicate the manner in which these provisions of the Convention will be applied in the organisation of examinations and the grant of certificates of qualification by the "Centro de Instrucción Técnica y Entrenamiento Naval" (CITEN).

Finally, the Committee wishes to point out that section 17 of the draft, which will permit the grant of certificates of qualification to cooks having more than two years of service at the date of the adoption of the regulations concerned, subject only to their passing a medical examination, is not in conformity with Article 5 of the Convention. This Article of the Convention permits a certificate of equivalence to be granted to seafarers having served two years as cooks before the expiry of a period of three years from the date of entry into force of the Convention for the country concerned. In the case of Peru, this period expired on 24 August 1965.

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

1. Further to its previous observation, the Committee notes the Government's reply to the earlier communication of the Maritime Trade Union of Crews in the Service of the Peruvian Steamship Company, referring to certain problems in the hygiene of food and water supplies. The Union had stated in its comments in December 1987 that drinking water tanks were rusty and in a poor condition, not being properly maintained, so that 90 per cent of crews suffered stomach complaints; they also referred to generally poor conditions of hygiene and infestation by vermin. The Government states in its report received February 1990 that the comments of the Union are unfounded. The Government states that appropriate action is always taken under the law - requiring corrective measures and if necessary imposing fines - when such questions arise.

2. The Committee has noted with interest the provisions of Supreme Decree No. 012-77-SA of 1977 concerning the quality and handling of food and water supplies (Article 5(1) of the Convention), and the arrangement of the catering department (Article 5(2)(b)). It is again referring to certain matters in a direct request.

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

Further to its previous observations, the Committee notes the Government's indication that its comments will be taken into account in the current revision of legislation. The Committee recalls that for several years it has been referring to the absence of provisions to apply the Convention. It hopes the next report will indicate the measures taken to give effect to the Convention.

The Committee is again referring to certain aspects of the Government's earlier draft legislation in a direct request.