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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2025, published 114th ILC session (2026)

Impact of forced labour of convicted persons on the application of Article 1 of the Convention. The Committee notes the adoption of Decision 1346/2024 establishing the obligation for all inmates of the federal prison service to participate in tasks involving maintenance, cleaning and hygiene of common and individual spaces in prisons. These activities may be performed for five hours a day without pay. The Decision also provides that the federal prison service will draw up specific plans and schedules for the assigned tasks and monitor their implementation.

In this regard, the Committee observes that the Act on terms of imprisonment (No. 24.660), as amended, provides that work constitutes a right and a duty for inmates (section 106); that the current labour and social security legislation must be respected (section 107); and that, notwithstanding the obligation to work, inmates will not be compelled to do work.

The Committee recalls that sentences involving compulsory labour may have an impact on the application of the Convention when they are applied in any of the circumstances provided for in Article 1 of the Convention. Observing that Decision 1346/2024 permits the imposition on prisoners of tasks which may be performed for five hours a day, referring in general to work involving maintenance of common areas in prisons, the Committee requests the Government to clarify the scope of the maintenance work that can be imposed, indicating the type of tasks required and the average daily, weekly or monthly hours imposed, and including examples of schedules established by the federal prison service in this respect.

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

Article 1(c) of the Convention

1. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to section 7 of Act No. 20840, as amended by Act No. 21459 of 18 November 1976, under which sentences of imprisonment involving the obligation to work may be inflicted upon any person who, through imprudence or negligence, destroys or damages raw materials, products, machinery, plant or other property of commercial, industrial, agricultural or mining enterprises or used for the provision of services. The Committee requested the Government to supply copies of the sentences relating to this provision and to supply information on the measures taken or contemplated in order to ensure that sentences involving compulsory labour are not imposed as a disciplinary measure in the field of work and to secure the observance of the Convention on this point.

The Committee notes the Government's statement in its report that the requested information will be transmitted rapidly.

The Committee notes that this point has been the subject of its comments for more than ten years. The Committee hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures to secure the observance of the Convention on this point and that it will supply information in its next report on the progress achieved in this respect.

Article 1(d)

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

The Committee noted that, according to the information contained in previous reports, it had not been possible to amend the above provision, although there were no restrictions on the right to strike.

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

The Committee noted the statements that no call-up had been made for the performance of the above compulsory services, even in the case of general strikes in which services were suspended that could have been essential.

The Committee notes the adoption of Decree No. 2184/90, of 16 October 1990, to issue regulations covering the machinery that is intended to prevent or, where appropriate, to orient labour disputes.

In view of the adoption of the above Decree and the fact that in practice the provisions in question, which have been the subject of the Committee's comments, are not applied, the Committee hopes that the Government will re-examine sections 194 of the Penal Code and 29 of Act No. 20318 and that it will take the necessary measures to bring the various texts of the national legislation respecting labour disputes in the essential services into harmony with each other and thereby give full effect to the Convention in this respect.

4. The Committee notes that by virtue of section 5 of Decree No. 2184/90, of 16 October 1990, "in the absence of prior agreement, the manner in which minimum services are to be provided will be established by the Ministry of Labour and Social Security".

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the appeal procedures that are available to the parties concerned against such decisions.

The Committee also notes that by virtue of section 7 of the above Decree "failure of workers who are obliged to provide minimum services to comply with their duty to work shall be regulated by the applicable legal provisions, regulations and agreements".

The Committee requests the Government to indicate the legal provisions which may be applicable under section 7 of Decree No. 2184/90.

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

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

Article 1(c) of the Convention

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

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

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

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

Article 1(d)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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