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

Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Kazakhstan (Ratification: 2001)

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. 1. Code of Administrative Offences. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government, in its report, concerning the conduct of a peaceful assembly, including the grounds for its termination. The Committee, however, observes the absence of information in the Government’s report on the provisions governing the sentence of administrative arrest which may be imposed under section 488 of the Code of Administrative Offences of 2014 for the violation of the law on the procedure for organizing and holding peaceful assemblies. The Committee recalls that according to section 913(2) of the Code, persons sentenced to administrative arrest shall be detained in custody at the places determined by internal affairs bodies. As per section 913(3) of the Code, the execution of administrative arrest shall be carried out in accordance with the rules established by the national legislation. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate whether the sanction of administrative arrest involves an obligation to perform labour and to specify the legislative provisions governing the execution of administrative arrest as provided in section 913(3) of the Code of Administrative Offences.

2. Criminal Code. The Committee notes with regret that the Government has not replied to the Committee’s previous request to provide information on the application in practice of a number of provisions of the Criminal Code which provide for penalties involving compulsory labour in circumstances that could relate to the expression of political views or views ideologically opposed to the system.

In order to enable the Committee to ascertain the scope of these provisions and their compatibility with Article 1(a) of the Convention, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on their application in practice, indicating the facts pursuant to which prosecutions and court decisions were handed down and the penalties imposed:

• section 131 (insult);
• section 372 (desecration of state symbols);
• section 376 (infringement on honour and dignity of the deputy of the Parliament of Kazakhstan);
• section 378 (insult of a representative of authority);
• section 411 (slander against a judge of the Constitutional Court of Kazakhstan, a judge, a juror, a prosecutor, a person conducting a pretrial investigation, an expert, a bailiff, or a justice officer).

Article 1(c). Sanctions for violations of labour discipline. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to a case involving a sentence of deprivation of liberty in 2024 under section 371 of the Criminal Code which provides for penalties involving compulsory labour, such as correctional work (punitive deduction of earnings), community service, restriction of freedom, or deprivation of liberty, for a failure to execute or improper execution by an official of his/her duties as the result of unscrupulous or negligent attitude towards service, if this entails infliction of substantial harm to the rights and legitimate interests of citizens or organizations, or legally protected interests of the society or the State. The Committee, however, notes that the Government does not provide information about the circumstances of the committed offence, including how the term “substantial harm” has been applied. The Government also indicates that section 371 of the Criminal Code may not be used as a means of labour discipline due to the unique approach to each case. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide detailed information on the manner in which inflicting “substantial harm” has been interpretated by courts to characterize the offence under section 371 of the Criminal Code and to convict perpetrators, so that the Committee can assess to what extent this section is compatible with the Convention.