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

Termination of Employment Convention, 1982 (No. 158) - Central African Republic (Ratification: 2006)

The Committee notes that there is a draft revised Labour Code and that the Government has received the International Labour Office’s assistance in this regard. The Committee also notes that the 2009 Labour Code is currently in force in the country.

Article 2(4) of the Convention. Exclusions. The Committee noted in its previous comments that the 2009 Labour Code excluded from its scope of application magistrates, public servants and members of the armed forces, and invited the Government to provide information on the protection afforded to these workers against unjustified dismissal. In its report, the Government indicates that it refers to the judicial mechanisms that are established specifically for each occupation. With regard to magistrates, the Government indicates that a disciplinary board handles disciplinary procedures and that the National Trade Union of Magistrates of the Central African Republic (SYNAMAC) can represent them on the Board. The Government specifies that the Higher Council of Magistrates decides on the promotion, reclassification and retirement of magistrates. Concerning armed forces’ personnel, the Government indicates that competence falls to a disciplinary board. Likewise, with regard to public servants, the Government indicates that a disciplinary board (composed of representatives of the trade unions, the Government and the public service) decides in all cases against them. The Government adds that public servants’ activities are governed by Act No. 09.014 of 14 August 2009. The Committee notes this information and recalls that the workers excluded from the application of the Convention must be subject to special arrangements which as a whole provide protection that is at least equivalent to that afforded under the Convention, which presupposes the existence of special provisions that match or exceed as a whole the level of protection laid down in the Convention (General Survey of 1995 on Protection against Unjustified Dismissal, paragraph 62). The Committee, therefore, requests the Government to provide detailed information on the legislation and regulations applicable to magistrates, public servants and members of the armed forces in the event of proceedings for unjustified dismissal before the special competent courts, and to indicate how such provisions afford them protection against unjustified dismissal that is at least equivalent to that afforded under the Convention. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of the relevant legislation and regulations.

Article 5. Unjustified reasons for termination. The Government once again reiterates that dismissal for personal and economic reasons is strictly regulated under sections 142 and 143 of the 2009 Labour Code. The Government adds that new provisions are set out in the draft revised Labour Code, which will strengthen these sections. The Government has also provided a list of decisions handed down by the courts in relation to unfair dismissal. The Government has not provided copies of these decisions nor information on the grounds for dismissal that were examined and considered unjustified. The Committee thus once again reiterates its request to the Government to indicate the measures adopted or envisaged to ensure that the other reasons set out in Article 5(d) and (e) of the Convention, including marital status and the family responsibilities of the worker, do not constitute valid reasons for termination. The Committee also requests the Government to provide detailed information on the decisions of principle handed down by the courts concerning unjustified reasons for termination, and to provide copies of these decisions.

Article 7. Procedure prior to termination. In the absence of information in this regard, the Committee once again reiterates its request to the Government to indicate the manner in which national law or practice gives effect to Article 7 of the Convention which provides that workers shall have an opportunity to defend themselves against the allegations made before being terminated for reasons relating to their conduct or performance.

Article 8(3). Right of appeal to an impartial body. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the Government’s indication that the competent jurisdiction to examine appeals against terminations is either the regional labour inspectorate or the labour tribunal. The Committee also noted that in the event of collective terminations authorized by a labour inspector, the worker or trade union concerned has a period of 30 days to lodge an appeal to the next hierarchical authority prior to the initiation of an adversarial appeal. The Committee recalls however that appeal before an impartial body excludes hierarchical or administrative appeal and that, where such a procedure exists, provision must be made for a subsequent appeal (General Survey of 1995, paragraph 178). In this context and in the absence of information in this regard, the Committee once again reiterates its request to the Government to indicate whether national law or practice provides for a reasonable period of time after which a worker may be deemed to have waived the right to appeal against termination before an impartial body.

Article 9(2). Burden of proof.In the absence of information in this regard, the Committee once again reiterates its request to the Government to indicate the substantive and/or procedural rules ensuring that workers do not have to bear alone the burden of proof in the event of an individual or collective appeal against termination.

Article 11. Period of notice. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the Government’s indication that, except in cases of serious misconduct, dismissed workers are entitled to a period of notice, the duration of which varies depending on the professional category. The Committee requested the Government to provide examples of court rulings illustrating the concept of serious misconduct in the law of the Central African Republic. The Government has provided a list of court decisions concerning unfair dismissal without, however, providing copies of these decisions or information on how the concept of serious misconduct is interpreted in these decisions. The Committee, therefore, requests the Government to provide detailed information on the decisions of principle rendered by courts illustrating the concept of serious misconduct in the law of the Central African Republic, and to provide copies of these decisions.

Article 13(1). Information and consultation of workers’ representatives. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, under section 143 of the 2009 Labour Code, any employer envisaging a termination for economic reasons is required to convene the staff delegates, the members of the enterprise committee and trade union delegates with a view to exploring other possibilities with them, in the presence of the labour inspector. In the absence of information in this regard, the Committee once again reiterates its request to the Government to indicate the time limit by which the relevant information has to be provided by the employer to the workers’ representatives when termination is contemplated, and to indicate the manner in which this period is calculated (working days or non-working days).

Application of the Convention in practice.In the absence of information in this regard, the Committee once again reiterates its request to the Government to include in its report statistics on the activities of the labour inspection services and of the courts in relation to terminations, including the number, duration and outcome of appeals, the level of compensation for termination, and examples of situations examined by the labour inspection services in relation to collective dismissals.