CMNT_TITLE

Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) - Senegal (RATIFICATION: 1960)

Previous comment

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. Punishment of vagrancy. The Committee notes that sections 241 to 243 of the Penal Code provide that vagrancy is an offence and that persons officially declared vagrants or “disreputable persons”, defined as persons with no fixed abode, no means of subsistence and no regular job or occupation, are for this reason alone liable to a penalty of from one to three months’ imprisonment. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the fact that these provisions of the Penal Code are not limited to the punishment of illicit activities or activities that would potentially disturb public order and could be considered as an indirect constraint on work in that they allow for penalties for the simple fact of having no regular job or occupation. It recalls, in this regard, that provisions relating to vagrancy based on too broad a definition thereof could be used to compel individuals to work, which could give rise to a situation similar to that where the law imposes a general obligation to work. The Committee therefore urges the Government to take the necessary measures to amend sections 241 to 243 of the Penal Code to restrict the scope of application of these provisions only to persons disturbing public order or who have earned income through illicit activities. In the meantime, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on any prosecution or penalty imposed under these provisions of the Penal Code.

Article 2(2)(c). Work exacted as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law. Community service. The Committee recalls that section 44-3 of the Penal Code grants judges discretion to include in their decisions the possibility for convicted prisoners who have served two thirds of their sentence to perform community service as an alternative to imprisonment. This penalty consists of unpaid work performed by the prisoner, with the prisoner’s consent, for public institutions or associations authorized to carry out community work. The Committee notes the Government’s statement, in its report, that associations wishing to receive convicted persons to carry out community work must be authorized by the judge responsible for the enforcement of sentences, subject to the approval of the Public Prosecutor, taking into account the social utility of the works proposed and the prospects for the social or vocational reintegration that these associations offer to convicted persons. The Government adds that the judge responsible for the enforcement of sentences establishes how the community service is to be carried out and specifies in their decision: (1) the organization for which the work is to be carried out; (2) the nature of the work to be carried out; and (3) the working hours. Generally, such work consists of manual tasks requiring few qualifications, such as the maintenance of public spaces and parks, repairs or painting.

The Committee recalls that, when community service can be performed for private entities, such as charitable associations or institutions, the conditions under which it may be performed must be appropriately managed and supervised in order to guarantee that the work carried out is of genuine use to the community and that the entities for which it is carried out are non-profit making. Recalling that section 44-8 of the Penal Code provides that the conditions under which associations are authorized to carry out community work and the nature of the work that may be carried out in this context shall be established by a decree, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether such a decree has been adopted and, if so, to provide a copy thereof. The Committee also requests the Government to provide more detailed information on the nature and/or the list of associations authorized to receive persons sentenced to this penalty, as well as examples of the types of work that may be exacted in this context.