Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Cambodia (RATIFICATION: 1999)

CMNT_TITLE_CAS

Written information provided by the Government

The Government has provided the following written information as well as copies of the Law on Amendment to the Criminal Code of 2018, the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Act on Prisons.

The Kingdom of Cambodia, as a reflection of its resolute commitment to abolish forced and compulsory labour within its jurisdiction, has duly ratified Convention No. 105. This ratification underscores the Kingdom’s steadfast determination to eradicate such practices throughout the nation. In the spirit of diligent adherence to this commitment, the Ministry of Labour and Vocational Training (MLVT) endeavours to elucidate the application of the Convention in Cambodia as outlined below.

Ensuring that no compulsory labour is imposed on persons who express political views or views opposed to the established system

We wish to underscore the fact that all Cambodian citizens are vested with unassailable freedoms, including the right to express their opinions peacefully and to partake in political activities. Such freedoms are safeguarded by the Constitution of the Kingdom of Cambodia, as well as the accompanying laws and regulations. It is therefore important to reaffirm that, in the jurisdiction of Cambodia, there exist no punitive measures for individuals who peacefully express their political views, including opposition members, human rights defenders and journalists, provided that such acts do not infringe the rights of others in accordance with the boundaries set by existing laws and regulations.

Human rights, as enshrined under the United Nations Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the other instruments relating to human rights, women’s rights and children’s rights, are unequivocally recognized and upheld by the Constitution. As articulated in article 36 of the Constitution, Khmer citizens of all genders are conferred the right to seek any employment, contingent upon their capabilities and societal requirements.

In adherence with international labour standards, Cambodia’s Labour Law (section 15) unequivocally proscribes forced or compulsory labour, in line with the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29). This provision extends to all individuals, including domestic or household and agricultural workers.

In accordance with the Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners, as declared by the United Nations General Assembly resolution 45/111 on 14 December 1990, conditions have been implemented to enable prisoners to engage in remunerated employment. This serves to foster their reintegration into the labour market, contribute to their own financial support and that of their families, and these principles have been enshrined in the national legislation, specifically in the Act on Prisons.

Prison labour is primarily a rehabilitative process aimed at facilitating the reintegration of prisoners into society. As per the Act on Prisons of 2011 (sections 68 and 69), low-risk convicted individuals possessing the requisite physical capabilities may be called upon to engage in work as part of the daily prison routine, or to perform tasks benefiting the community or participate in prison industry, prison handicraft and the prison farming industry. Such employment is not assigned based on political opposition, human rights advocacy or journalistic activity, and safety measures are diligently implemented.

The Government continually affirms its commitment to the principles enshrined in the Constitution of the Kingdom of Cambodia, as well as in the UN Charter, Universal Declaration of Human Rights and various human rights instruments. All Cambodians, irrespective of race, colour, gender, language, religion, political views, origin, nationality, socio-economic class, or possession, are equal before the law.

The MLVT has never encountered instances of convicted individuals being forced into prison labour on account of political opposition, human rights advocacy or journalistic activity. The MLVT stands ready to cooperate with the relevant authorities to take swift action should it be informed of such an occurrence. Furthermore, no tangible evidence has been uncovered that suggests prison labour is being utilized as a form of punishment for individuals voicing political views or dissenting from the established system. The MLVT therefore, invites the ILO and the relevant stakeholders to provide detailed information should any evidence arise.

Information regarding the draft Cybercrime Law and the Law on Amendment to the Criminal Code

With respect to the formulation of the draft Cybercrime Law, the Ministry of the Interior is steadfastly committed to upholding the Constitution and laws of the Kingdom of Cambodia. This endeavour is grounded on strong recognition of human rights as enshrined in the United Nations Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other instruments relating to human rights, women’s rights and children’s rights. In this regard, a dedicated working group has convened a review meeting, engaging with a technical team from the Ministry of the lnterior, and hosted an inter-ministerial technical retreat that featured representatives from the Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications, Ministry of Information, Ministry of lndustry, Science, Technology and Innovation, and the Ministry of Commerce. This collaborative process has facilitated the advancement of this initiative. In the meantime, the draft Cybercrime Law is under deliberation with all relevant stakeholders, with a concerted effort being made to integrate and harmonize input from all parties to ensure the law’s effectiveness, efficiency, pertinence and coherence.

Prohibiting compulsory labour as a sanction for peaceful strikes

With reference to the matters involving Mr Van Narong and Mr Pel Voeun, the cases are still subject to the appeals process. It is significant to note that both Mr Van Narong and Mr Pel Voeun are actively employed, thus invalidating any alleged imprisonment.

As to the arrest of union leaders at the casino, the MLVT is compelled to clarify that the strike carried out by the union leaders in question breached the legal prerequisites for the exercise of the right to strike. Indeed, while it is an entitlement for workers to organize a strike, certain legal conditions must be met before such an action can take place. These conditions entail the Arbitration Council’s (AC) failure to deliver or notify its decision within the legal time frame, and the occurrence of an objection to a non-binding arbitral award. It is crucial to note that these conditions were not met in this instance.

Consequently, on 16 December 2021, the Phnom Penh Court of First Instance issued a provisional ruling indicating that the collective labour dispute at Naga World needed to go through the AC procedure and mechanism. The court further ruled that any new demands which had not yet been subjected to the AC process could not be a valid cause for a strike, as specified in the Labour Law. However, despite this ruling, the terminated workers initiated their strike outside Naga World.

Naga World’s former employees were held accountable for their actions and subsequently detained, following charges under section 494 (incitement) and section 495 (incitement to commit felony) of the Criminal Code. This legal action stemmed from the fact that their participation in the strike, deemed illegal, had created substantial disturbances to public order and safety.

Additional arrests were made when these individuals were found to be infringing the right to life of others amid the COVID-19 pandemic. This violation was predicated on their refusal to comply with the government-mandated COVID-19 preventative measures, notably the omission of rapid testing and disregard for social distancing protocols during the course of the strike. In total, the transgressions led to the arrest of 11 strikers.

In response, these individuals wrote a letter to the MLVT requesting its intervention through legal means to secure their release on bail. They further promised to strictly adhere to health guidelines, desist from obstructing COVID-19 sample testing, and abstain from any gatherings or protests that could potentially compromise public order, peace and security as part of their endeavours to amicably resolve the labour dispute.

In concordance with their plea, and following the provision of legal assistance by the MLVT and the Ministry of Justice, the Phnom Penh court of first instance delivered a ruling on 14 March 2022. The court ordered the release on bail of the former workers, thereby addressing their pleas.

The case of the arrested leaders of the Workers Friendship Union Federation is currently ambiguous, due to insufficient information about their employer. Thus, the MLVT invites the ILO and the relevant stakeholders to share detailed information, facilitating appropriate action.

Discussion by the Committee

Chairperson – We will start our discussion on the second case in our agenda, that is Cambodia on the application of Convention No. 105.

Government representative – This Committee is the cornerstone of the ILO’s supervisory system and plays an integral role in ensuring the application of international labour Conventions. Sharing the same dedication, the Royal Kingdom of Cambodia has honoured its commitment to uphold all rights and obligations set forth in this Convention ratified by Cambodia.

As a testament to our dedication, Cambodia proudly holds an outstanding record of having ratified eight fundamental international labour Conventions. We try to maintain cooperative and constructive relations with all social and development partners to ensure the protection of labour rights and foster harmonious industrial relations for bolstering economic development in Cambodia.

Recognizing the Committee’s significant contribution, Cambodia has actively engaged with the ILO supervisory mechanism in line with our commitments and in addition to the relevant written information provided in May 2023. My delegation took note of the report of the Committee of Experts and is pleased to offer further updates on the application of the Convention in Cambodia.

In this connection, it is worth noting that the Constitution upholds and incorporates the fundamental principles of human rights enshrined in the United Nations Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and international human rights instruments. Both human rights and labour rights are well protected by law and practice in Cambodia.

We are proud to declare that forced labour has no room in Cambodia, so there is no suggestion of forced labour in the Kingdom, but what only exists is those who really need a job and work hard to get better paid to support their livelihoods and families. Consistent with international labour standards, section 15 of the Labour Law prohibits forced or compulsory labour in accordance with the Convention, which was ratified by the Kingdom of Cambodia in 1969. We are pleased to highlight that under the Convention, the term forced or compulsory labour refers to all kinds of work or service which are exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily.

The Convention also excludes any work or service exacted from an individual as a consequence of a legal conviction provided that it is carried out under the public authority’s supervision and not hired out to private entities. As stipulated in the UN Basic Principles for Treatment of Prisoners, conditions should be made to enable prisoners to undertake meaningful remunerated employment to facilitate their integration into the labour market.

Cambodia reaffirms its commitment to the promotion and protection of human rights by incorporating this approach into national legislation, particularly its Act on Prisons. Furthermore, the Act on Prisons is in line with a wide range of international instruments, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention against Torture, among others. This law aims to educate, reform and rehabilitate prisoners for their integration into society. We took note of the Committee of Experts’ concern regarding the various provisions of the Cambodian Criminal Code. To provide further context it is pertinent to note that section 5 of the Criminal Code clearly mandates a strict interpretation of criminal law. This is not contrary to the concerns raised by the Committee of Experts to ensure that the provisions of the Criminal Code do not present any coercion.

We took note of the Committee of Experts’ concern regarding the alleged imprisonment of two unionists. In this case, we wish to clarify that their cases are currently under appeal. Contrary to the allegation of imprisonment, they remain actively employed and fully enjoy the right to a fair trial. Furthermore, the arrest of the protesters, as indicated in the report of the Committee of Experts, was not merely due to their participation in illegal strikes, but legal action was primarily undertaken in response to their substantial disturbance of public order and safety, in violation of COVID-19 preventive laws to ensure the right to life of others during the pandemic.

We express concern about our double footnoted case. There is no evidence that has been uncovered suggesting that prison labour is being utilized as a form of punishment for those opposed to the established system or who engage in a strike. If such information is sufficiently presented, Cambodia would act swiftly. Therefore, we invite the ILO and relevant stakeholders to provide detailed information should any surface. Our intention to commit to the rule of law, strengthening the implementation of laws and regulations, is of paramount importance to ensure our good governance remains intact. As such, law enforcement should not be misconstrued as a political pressure.

In conclusion, my delegation thanks the Committee for this opportunity and reaffirms the Cambodian commitment to promote protection and respect for the principles enshrined in all relevant instruments to which Cambodia is a state party.

Worker members – The climate that is currently prevailing, and has done for many years in Cambodia, is hardly conducive to the exercise of public freedoms, including freedom of association and the freedom to engage in collective action.

Indeed, the report of the Committee of Experts refers to arrests and prosecutions of members of the opposition party, representatives of non-governmental organizations, trade unionists and human rights defenders. Several members of the only opposition party in Cambodia, the Cambodia National Rescue Party, have been imprisoned with the obligation to perform prison labour. The report also refers to the arrest of 25 human rights defenders and the convictions of 9 opposition politicians. Nearly 50 cases of the harassment of journalists were also reported in 2021. The convictions of Van Narong and Pel Voeun, members of the Cambodian Labour Confederation (CLC), sentenced to imprisonment for misdemeanour and malicious defamation, are also referred to in the report of the Committee of Experts. More recently, we are also bound to deplore the conviction to sentences of imprisonment of the leaders of the Labor Rights Supported Union (LRSU) under provisions of the Criminal Code to which we will return shortly.

All of these events show that public and trade union freedoms are flouted in Cambodia. And yet the free exercise of these public and trade union freedoms is a prerequisite for the exercise of the fundamental freedoms enshrined in the international labour instruments that are applicable in Cambodia. International institutions and experts are raising similar concerns. The UN Human Rights Committee expressed concern at the persistent violations of freedom of expression, the arrest and detention of demonstrators, the dissolution of the Cambodia National Rescue Party in 2017 and of three other opposition parties in 2021, the threats, harassment, arbitrary arrests and collective trials suffered by members of the opposition and the continuing absence of an independent and impartial judiciary. On several occasions, United Nations experts and the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia have also denounced these practices.

All of this should not leave the Government of Cambodia unmoved. It is high time to remedy this situation and restore an environment that is conducive to the exercise of public freedoms, which are a prerequisite for compliance with international labour standards, including this Convention.

Today, we are called upon to examine the conformity with the Convention of the law and practice in Cambodia. It will very rapidly be clear from our examination that many legal provisions and their application in Cambodia are contrary to the requirements of the Convention.

Under the terms of Article 1(a) of the Convention, each Member “undertakes to suppress and not make use of any form of forced or compulsory labour … as a means of political coercion or education or as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system”. The Act on Political Parties provides that that prison sentences include the requirement to work. Read in conjunction with other provisions of Cambodian legislation, this provision has the consequence that certain of the activities covered by Article 1(a) of the Convention may be punished by prison sentences involving the obligation to work. Section 68 of the Act on Prisons provides that sentences of imprisonment involve the obligation to work. Read in conjunction with other provisions of Cambodian legislation, this provision has the consequence that certain of the activities covered by Article 1(a) of the Convention may be punished by prison sentences involving the obligation to work.

The following provisions are referred to in particular in the report of the Committee of Experts:

- section 42 of the Act on Political Parties, as amended in 2017, under which various offences related to the administration or management of a political party which has been dissolved, or whose activities have been suspended by a court, or whose registration has been refused, are punishable by imprisonment of up to one year;

- sections 494 and 495 on incitement to disturb public security by speech, writing, images or any other audio-visual communication in public or to the public;

- section 522 on publication of commentaries intended to unlawfully coerce judicial authorities;

- section 523 of the Criminal Code of 2009 on discrediting judicial decisions;

- sections 305 to 309 on public defamation and insult; and

- sections 445 and 437 bis of the Criminal Code relating to insult and criticism of the King.

As we have seen, these provisions have been used for the imprisonment and conviction of political dissidents, journalists, bloggers and trade unionists, who may be required to perform work. It is clear that the route that should be adopted is the removal of any criminal sanctions for the expression of democratic political opinions. The prohibition set out in the Convention is nevertheless very clear, as such penalties may not involve the requirement to work.

The case of Cambodia also offers an opportunity to address the prohibition contained in Article 1(d) of the Convention, which provides that each Member “undertakes to suppress and not to make use of any form of forced or compulsory labour … as a punishment for having participated in strikes”. It nevertheless appears from the report of the Committee of Experts that trade unions have been struck with criminal convictions following their participation in peaceful forms of collective action.

We should not have to reiterate the extent to which the exercise of the right to collective action is fundamental for the defence of fundamental labour rights. For this reason, the Convention provides that participation in a strike cannot give rise to punishment involving a sentence of forced labour. And yet the law and practice in Cambodia do not appear to be in conformity with the requirement set out in Article 1(d) of the Convention.

The abolition of forced labour is a fundamental objective of the ILO. There can be no social justice when forced labour is rife. The in-depth revision of the law and practice in Cambodia referred to above in relation to criminal penalties is indispensable to the re-establishment of an environment conducive to the exercise of public freedoms in the country, including freedom of association and the freedom of collective action.

Employer members – The Employer members stress the importance of States’ compliance with the Convention, which is one of the ten ILO fundamental Conventions.

By way of background, Cambodia ratified the Convention in 1999. We note that, so far, the Committee of Experts has provided four observations on this case, namely in 2014, 2017, 2018 and 2022. Today is the second time that the Committee looks at the application of the Convention in Cambodia. We take note that the Committee of Experts identified this case this year as a double-footnoted case. However, we also note that the issues raised were not addressed by the direct contacts mission which was in Cambodia last year. The apparent lack of serious concerns prior to this and their being raised this year in close proximity to the national elections in which several of the senior union figures quoted in this case are likely to play a prominent part, does actually raise a question in our minds as to why it was double-footnoted. It just does not have the history that other cases that have been double-footnoted have. In any event the Committee of Experts identified two main issues here.

One, sanctions involving the obligation to work as a punishment for the expression of political views contrary to Article 1(a) of the Convention, and second, the compulsory labour imposed on workers as punishment for participating in strikes, contrary to Article 1(d) of the Convention.

Allow me to briefly recall that the Workers have expressed concern over the imposition of sanctions involving forced labour to censor the expression of opposing views on political, social or economic matters, as well as courts’ arbitrariness in imposing such sanctions. These concerns arose after the dissolution of a major opposition party in 2017 and the subsequent imprisonment of its leaders.

The Government, for its part, has pointed out that interpreting section 68 of the Act on Prisons as contrary to the Convention is inappropriate. It stressed that imposition of compulsory labour on low-risk prisoners is aimed at providing education and rehabilitation in accordance with international standards relating to prisoners. We note that requiring prisoners to participate in activities that are rehabilitative in nature and do not involve abuse or harm is, in fact, common around the world.

In its observations, as well in the 2012 General Survey, the Committee of Experts notes that, while convict labour exacted from common offenders is intended to reform or rehabilitate them, the same need does not arise in the case of persons convicted for having expressed their opinions or for having organized or participated in a strike. This surprises the Employer members, as there is an inconsistency in the Committee of Experts suggesting that there are different regimes – completely different regimes – depending on whether or not the circumstances relate to freedom of expression or criminal offences. I will come back to this point.

The Employer members emphasize the importance of freedom of expression, including expressing political views and engaging in politics, as fundamental values of democratic societies. We take note of the UN Human Rights Committee’s and human rights experts’ concern regarding allegations of persistent violation of freedom of expression, the dissolution of opposition parties and the imprisonment – involving compulsory labour – of members of the opposition, human rights defenders and journalists.

We also take note of the Committee of Experts’ observation on the continued use of national criminal provisions to arrest, prosecute and convict human rights defenders, opposition members and journalists for expressing their political views or views ideologically opposed to the established system, leading to the imposition of penalties of imprisonment, including involving labour.

In this regard, the Employer members align with the Committee of Experts in asking the Government to take immediate and effective measures to ensure that persons who express political views or views opposed to the established system in a manner not designed to incite unrest, insurrection or violence are not subjected to punitive sanctions involving compulsory labour. The Employer members similarly align with the Committee of Experts’ recommendation urging the Government to review the scope of the relevant criminal provisions so as to ensure that their application in practice does not lead to the violation of Article 1(a) of the Convention.

To that end, we echo the Committee of Experts’ request to provide a copy of the 2018 Criminal Code amendments criminalizing criticism of the King as well as information on the practical application of criminal provisions falling within the scope of Article1(a) of the Convention.

Concerning punishment for participation in strikes, this is a new issue that the Committee of Experts identified in its observation in relation to Cambodia’s application of the Convention. We take note of the ITUC’s observations regarding two members of the CLC being sentenced to imprisonment for misdemeanour and malicious defamation. We also take note of the Committee of Experts’ observations on the arrest and prosecution of four trade unionist leaders accused of having organized an illegal strike; of a referral by UN human rights experts concerning the arrest and detention of union leaders and activists during a strike; and of the concern expressed by UN experts as to the use of COVID-19 measures to restrict lawful and peaceful strikes. We agree with the Committee of Experts’ request to the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the application of legislative provisions does not lead in practice to the imposition of sanctions involving compulsory labour on workers for the mere fact of organizing or peacefully participating in strikes.

Furthermore, we agree with the Committee of Experts in requesting the Government to provide a copy of the court decision regarding the arrest and prosecution of the four union leaders. However, we also note that the instances cited are not clear evidence in themselves of systemic departure from the provisions of the Convention. It is, in our view, not sufficient to conflate membership of a union with imprisonment for offences against national law as an argument to support allegations of breaches of the Convention. Rather, it is necessary to understand the prevailing circumstances in each case. For instance, it would be relevant to know the details of the conduct of the cited individuals at the time of their arrest. That is why sighting the relevant court decision is important.

This is not to deny that those imprisoned have been wrongly treated. Rather it is making the point that we need to look under every stone when such instances occur to make sure there is a breach of international standards and not a straightforward transgression of valid criminal law.

That said, we remain concerned that such discrimination is even possible under Cambodia’s law. In that regard, since the discussion of this case in 2018, there has been no apparent progress with regard to legally protecting freedom of expression and national provisions continue to be used to prosecute and convict persons for expressing their political views. We therefore call upon the Government to avail itself of ILO technical assistance to assist in addressing the issues raised here.

We also request the Government to address, in consultation with its social partners, issues arising from the instances of arrest and imprisonment of trade union officials to ensure that these instances were in compliance with the Convention and to that end to provide a copy of the court judgments relating to those instances. We also request the Government to provide a copy of the 2018 Criminal Code amendments criminalizing criticism of the King, as well as information on the practical application of criminal provisions falling within the scope of Article1(a) of the Convention. And lastly, we urge the Government to take steps to ensure that work required of prisoners is compatible with the stated objection of education and rehabilitation, and not a punitive measure. Thank you for your attention. We look forward to hearing the remaining comments.

Worker member, Cambodia – I am the President of the CLC and, on behalf of Cambodian workers, I would like to stress on the labour situation in Cambodia.

The Government of Cambodia has ratified 13 ILO Conventions including core labour standards in 1999. The Committee of Experts, as well as this Committee in 2018, conclude that Cambodia should bring its laws and practices into compliance with the Convention. No penalties involving forced labour or compulsory labour may be imposed in compliance with Article 1(a) of the Convention. As pointed out by the Committee of Experts again in their report, the penal sanction of forced and compulsory work under convicted criminal sentences is still provided for in section 68 of the Cambodian Act on Prisons. Expressing political views and opinions that oppose the political, social and economic systems in Cambodia is still not free without the risk of penal sanctions, contrary to Article 1(a) of the Convention.

Workers and trade unions are not free from the threat of penal sanctions when conducting and taking part in labour strikes and protests under Article 1(d) of the Convention.

Review of labour legislation: the Committee of Experts has asked the Government to ensure that the penalties under a number of provisions in domestic laws do not involve forced and compulsory labour. In the experience of the trade unions, the Criminal Code and other penal offences in our laws are often used by Government authorities, employers and strike-breakers to prosecute and convict us when we are conducting trade union activities, expressing public opinions and also conducting strikes.

In too many cases, the following provisions are used against workers and union leaders to sentence them to jail or put them under prolonged and non-transparent legal procedures for years without a trial. These include the Criminal Code: section 28 (instigation); sections 494 and 495 (incitement to commit felony); sections 217–218 (intentional violence); section 411 (intentional damages); sections 311 and 312 (defamation); section 424 (threats to destroy); section 78 (obstruction under the Act on Traffic); as well as section 11 (Act on prevention of the spread of COVID-19).

We are concerned that incitement charges under sections 494 and 495 are actively used to silence trade unionists and activists from publicly expressing and sharing their views and criticisms of Government policies and practices and to intimidate workers from continuously taking part in strikes and protests led by trade unions. We would not be able to perform our role, we would not be able to speak up and organize collective bargaining if these provisions can be broadly applied to criminalize our opinions and trade union actions.

We urge the Government to consult and review the broad scope and arbitrary application of these legal provisions with trade unions and the social partners, and to ensure that these provisions are not used to harass and penalize the free expression of political opinions, the free organization of trade union activities, labour strikes and protests.

Convictions and sentences for expressing opinions, organizing strikes and trade unions: we are deeply concerned at the arrests, detention, judicial harassment and conviction of members of independent trade unions, NGOs and association representatives, independent journalists, human rights defenders and social activists in Cambodia when exercising the right to express opinions and conducting strikes and labour protests.

In 2016, 46 workers of a bus company were dismissed for organizing a trade union. Federation union leaders and activists were charged with multiple criminal offences. Van Narong and Pel Voeun were given suspended sentences of imprisonment of six months for misdemeanour and malicious defamation. The case is still pending in the Appeal Court. Mr Ya Kuyny and Mr Ngim Bunthy were sentenced to two years in prison in 2018.

Mr Chan Rith, Mr Seb Thon and Mr Tep Sopha, leader and members of the Farmer Association for Peace and Development (FAPD), were sued in two separate cases by landowners and the Ministry of the Environment on charges of intentional violence in farmers’ protests against land grabbing. Tep Sopha was sentenced to one year of imprisonment and completed his sentence in 2020.

Ms Tang Sakbuoy was sued by her employer for fabricated criminal offences after she and others formed a trade union. She was sentenced to 18 months in prison in 2020. The Court has upheld an arrest warrant against her.

Rong Chhun, President of the Cambodian Confederation of Unions (CCU), was convicted of incitement to commit felony and social unrest after he made public comments on the loss of land by farmers in border areas. He was sentenced to two years in prison in 2021.

Chhim Sithar and eight members of the LRSU were convicted of incitement to commit felony for leading strikes to protest against mass retrenchment and union-busting by a casino group. They were sentenced to between one-and-a-half and two years in prison in May 2023.

We urge the Government to drop all charges against trade union leaders, labour association leaders and activists for exercising the right to freedom of expression, freedom of organization and the right to strike and protest. We also urge the Government to expedite the resolution of the long‑standing criminal cases concerning freedom of association with trade unionists. Of the 44 criminal cases submitted to the Government in 2018, 29 cases are still pending.

Employer member, Cambodia – I speak on behalf of the Cambodian Federation of Employers and Business Associations. First of all, we request that any issues that are beyond the scope of the discussions of the Convention, which is the main topic today, be removed from the record of proceedings. As there is a lot of information today, we are not prepared to respond to all of it. Let me start by giving you the context.

Cambodian Employers wish to draw the attention of the Committee to the content of this Cambodian case. Cambodia is holding national elections on 23 July this year, which is only a few weeks from now. Around this time, political election campaigns are being carried out intensely on the ground right now and political parties are campaigning to win voter support and competing to reach voters through both national and international platforms. We Cambodian Employers wish to reaffirm our adherence to the Conventions that Cambodia has ratified, and widespread support for compliance with the Conventions by the tripartite partners and other interested parties, including the Convention.

The matter brought before the Committee today refers to claims and events relating to activities by political parties and trade unions, respectively. We are not aware that in Cambodia in law and practice there is punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established system or for participating in a lawful strike.

While taking the matter very seriously, we would respectfully ask the Committee of Experts to provide more concrete evidence of forced labour or compulsory labour so that these cases can be effectively addressed.

In Cambodia, insofar as the Labour Law provides for certain sanctions and punishments in the context of strikes, those sanctions are specific and limited to protecting non-striking workers from coercion or threats, protecting striking workers from unlawful sanctions by employers, and protecting striking workers from replacement beyond minimum service arrangements. That stated, the Labour Law also provides that a strike must be peaceful. Committing acts of violence during a strike is considered serious misconduct that could be subject to punishment. Under Cambodia’s legal system, the commission of violence or other crimes that can implicate the Criminal Code subjects the offender to criminal sanctions pursuant to law.

As the Committee of Experts has noted from the observations of the ITUC, the two individuals at issue were sentenced to imprisonment for the commission of crimes under the Criminal Code. As it appears, their sanctions result from the prosecution of crimes they committed, not from participation in a strike. The Committee of Experts notes the ITUC observation according to which the two individuals were sentenced after taking part in a protest. However, participation in a strike does not render any individual immune from prosecution for the commission of criminal acts or other violations of the law. Regarding the actual facts and circumstances of the two individuals, the Government has indicated the that individuals in question are not imprisoned, and that they are in fact actively employed. This would exclude that they are now subject to any form of forced or compulsory labour.

In conclusion, on behalf of Cambodian Employers, let me say that we are deeply concerned about the potential adverse impacts of continuing to consider allegations that do not have concrete evidence of breaches of the Convention on real lives and livelihoods in Cambodia. In our view, paying attention to such allegations without having grounds in fact or sharing concrete evidence places Cambodia at risk of being misperceived and wrongfully maligned as being involved in forced labour and modern slavery. The impact and loss can be devastating, not only for Cambodia’s reputation, but also its ability to attract tourists, talent and investment, and in turn will harm Cambodia’s workers, businesses and sustainable development.

Now, if there are situations with concrete evidence of forced labour, we certainly call on the Government to look into the issue to resolve these issues regarding forced labour and, if need be, request technical assistance from the ILO.

Government member, Sweden – I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its Member States. The candidate countries Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, North Macedonia, Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, the EFTA country Norway, members of the European Economic Area, align themselves with this statement.

In line with the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy of 2020, we are committed to the promotion, protection, respect and fulfilment of human rights, of which labour rights are an integral part, including the abolition of forced labour.

In this endeavour, we support the ILO in its indispensable role to develop, promote and supervise the application of international labour standards and of fundamental Conventions in particular.

The EU and its Member States have been committed development partners of Cambodia, including through the “Everything But Arms” (EBA) arrangement under the EU’s Generalized Scheme of Preferences, granting duty-free and quota-free access to the EU market, resulting in sustained growth and job creation in past decades.

The trade benefits granted under the EBA arrangement are subject to the condition that Cambodia respects core international principles, enshrined in core UN and ILO Conventions. Due to serious and systematic violations of human rights, especially the right to political participation and fundamental freedom, as of August 2020, this preferential treatment has been partially suspended. We have continuously expressed our deep concerns over political developments in the country.

We deeply regret the existence of provisions in various laws, such as the Act on Prisons of 2011, the Act on Political Parties as amended in 2017 and the Criminal Code of 2009 as amended in 2018, which provide scope for penal sanctions that may involve compulsory labour, and which the Cambodian authorities continue to use against members of opposition parties, activists and human rights defenders, as well as journalists and social media activists, and trade union members. We express our deep concern about the persistent violation of freedom of expression. We deplore the fact that people expressing dissent or criticism continue to be convicted and sentenced to penalties of imprisonment that may involve compulsory prison labour. No penalties that may involve compulsory labour should be imposed for the peaceful expression of political views or views opposed to the established system.

We note with concern the observations of the UN Human Rights Committee. We join the Committee of Experts and call on the Cambodian authorities to take immediate and effective measures to ensure that persons who express political views or views opposed to the established political, economic or social system are not punished with penal sanctions. We therefore urge the Cambodian authorities to restrict the scope of the provisions of the relevant laws to situations connected with the use of violence or incitement to violence by repealing sanctions involving compulsory labour to ensure that their application in practice does not lead to the violation of the Convention.

The next steps of the Cambodian authorities on stipulations of the draft Cybercrime Law, currently under preparation, and on the sub-decree on the National Internet Gateway, the implementation of which has been suspended, will be a litmus test of the willingness of the Cambodian authorities to engage and change their course of action.

In line with the Committee of Experts, we also urge the Cambodian authorities to take the necessary measures to ensure that the application of legislative provisions will not lead in practice to the imposition of sanctions that may involve forced labour on workers and trade union members for the mere fact of organizing or peacefully participating in strikes. We are worried about reports related to the arrests and prosecution of trade union members and leaders for participation in strikes. We join the call by the Committee of Experts on the Cambodian authorities to provide a copy of the court decision regarding the four leaders of the Workers Friendship Union Federation who were arrested and prosecuted following the organization of a strike.

In relation to forced labour in general, we are alarmed by the number of cases of human trafficking involving forced labour and their dramatic increase over the last two years. In this regard, we urge the authorities to step up their efforts to combat and prevent trafficking in persons in the country. We continue to request the Cambodian authorities to take the necessary measures to ensure the prosecution of these cases, to provide timely information on arrests and convictions, and to protect and assist victims of trafficking.

We also strongly encourage the Cambodian authorities to implement all the other recommendations arising from the ILO’s direct contacts mission in the spring of 2022, to stop labour rights violations and embark on a constructive path of reform. The EU and its Member States will remain closely seized of the situation in Cambodia.

Government member, Switzerland – Switzerland reiterates the concerns raised last year, and in 2017, in this Committee in relation to the application by Cambodia of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87).

Since 1999, Cambodia has appeared regularly on the list of cases examined by the Committee. Today, Switzerland expresses its concern at the use of the provisions of the Criminal Code for the systematic restriction of freedom of expression and freedom of association. It is essential for everyone, and particularly journalists, human rights defenders, political opponents and social media activists, to be able to express their views freely without the risk of reprisals.

Switzerland recalls that, in accordance with Article 1 of the Convention, the exercise of freedom of expression and opinion, as well as freedom of association and of assembly, must not be subject to arbitrary restrictions, nor lead to penalties involving the obligation to work.

Switzerland therefore firmly condemns the practices described by the Committee of Experts and the Special Rapporteur on Cambodia of the UN Human Rights Council intended to punish persons who express or peacefully demonstrate their opposition to the established political, social or economic system. It has noted the observations made and explanations provided by the Government of Cambodia and calls for the adoption of all the necessary measures to bring an end to these practices.

Worker member, Australia – On behalf of the Australian union movement, I register our deep concern over the situation of workers’ rights in Cambodia, where criminal offences are broadly used by the Government to criminalize the normal activities of trade unionists, the free expression of opinions and the right to lead and participate in strikes.

The Committee of Experts observes that opposition political activists, journalists, human rights defenders and social media activists who express dissent or criticism of the authorities under the protected scope of this Convention are convicted and imprisoned obliging them to perform forced or compulsory work pursuant to section 68 of the Act on Prisons.

The conviction and sentencing of Mr Rong Chhun, President of the CCU in 2020, was made on the basis of the claims of lost land by farmers resulting from the work of the Joint Border Affairs Committee demarcating the border between Cambodia and Viet Nam during his visit to the area on 20 July 2020. On 30 July 2020, Mr Rong Chhun was arrested and detained pending a trial under charges of “incitement to commit a felony or cause social unrest” under sections 494 and 495 of the Criminal Code. Ms Sar Kanika, President of the Cambodian Informal Labour Association, and Mr Ton Nimol, member of the Cambodia Watchdog Council, who had joined protests calling for Rong Chhun’s release, were both arrested on 7 August for posting Rong Chhun’s statement on social media and charged under the same criminal offence and put under pretrial detention. On 18 August 2021, Rong Chhun was sentenced to 24 months in prison, and Sar Kanika and Ton Nimol were sentenced to 20 months. In November 2021, the Phnom Penh municipal court ruled on the appeal and suspended their sentences. They served 15 months in prison including pretrial detention.

The UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia noted in 2021 that “the prison terms and heavy fines handed to these three activists are neither justified nor proportionate”.

The Government continues to use imprisonment and the threat of penal sanctions to suppress dissent. Indeed, just this Friday, Prime Minister Hun Sen made an explicit public threat to reimprison Rong Chhun, who is now also Vice-President of the Candlelight Party, and his supporters if they protested against the Candlelight Party’s disqualification.

We call on the Government to respect their obligations under the Convention by ceasing the criminalization of dissent and to immediately and unconditionally release individuals who have been imprisoned for exercising their right to freedom of expression and assembly, including union leader Chhim Sithar and her fellow unionists, who have just been sentenced two weeks ago targeted for exercising their rights to freedom of association.

Government member, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland – The United Kingdom commends the Royal Government of Cambodia for supporting the ILO’s Better Factories Cambodia programme, which monitors and reports on working conditions in Cambodian garment factories, thereby helping factories improve working conditions according to national and international standards.

The United Kingdom also notes Cambodia’s long-standing cooperation with the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights and its progress on economic, social and cultural rights. We applaud Cambodia for its response to the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in terms of social protection and healthcare.

Acknowledging the economic progress that Cambodia has made over the past 20 years, the United Kingdom remains committed to working with Cambodia in its efforts to also advance civil and political rights through constructive dialogue

Strengthening human rights protections, such as freedom of speech, association and thought, would also support Cambodia’s economic sector by encouraging innovation through the open sharing of ideas and information. Therefore, the United Kingdom regrets the sentencing of Chhim Sithar, leader of the LRSU, and eight other current and former union members on 25 May 2023.

The United Kingdom appeals to the Cambodian authorities to recall the fundamental importance of respect for freedom of association as one of the primary safeguards of peace and social justice, as was fully recognized by Cambodia when it voluntarily ratified ILO Convention No. 87 and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), over 20 years ago.

At the same time, the United Kingdom continues to monitor restrictions on civil and political space and is concerned about the ongoing restrictions on civil and political space.

We are disappointed that the Voice of Democracy, one of Cambodia’s few independent media outlets, has been closed. The United Kingdom has publicly stated that a free press is essential to open and democratic societies. Freedom of expression is not measured by the number of media outlets a nation has; media outlets must be independent and balanced.

The United Kingdom also regrets the handling and outcome of the Kem Sokha case and his sentencing to 27 years of house arrest, as well as the decision of the Cambodian Electoral Commission to reject the Candlelight Party’s election registration.

The United Kingdom calls on Cambodia to continue to engage in constructive dialogue and to implement the recommendations of the report.

Employer member, Thailand – I am making this statement on behalf of the ASEAN Confederation of Employers (ACE). Freedom from forced or compulsory labour is a cornerstone of the decent work concept and we join Cambodia in reaffirming adherence and support for the abolition of forced labour.

Concerning the Cambodia case, we consider Cambodia has set out a strong and compelling case for its compliance, while also providing valuable contextual information and facts of the case and underscoring the importance of analysis of how the Convention is applied, taking into account the different national realities and legal systems that exist in Cambodia. In this regard, we wish to emphasize and highlight the value and effectiveness of Cambodia’s national systems in addressing important issues of interest. The systems we have established in Cambodia, including systems of social dialogue, whether formal or informal, tripartite or bipartite, are inherently context-sensitive, helping to promote consensus, build better employment relationships and advance industrial peace, which ultimately benefits workers, employers, economic and social development in Cambodia. In this respect, we urge this Committee to take into account the above factors and respect the existing internal system and practices implemented in Cambodia.

Worker member, Switzerland – The Committee of Experts has rightly again expressed its deep concerns over the continued use of the provisions of the national legislation, including the Criminal Code, to prosecute and convict persons who express views opposed to the authorities in Cambodia, or take part in strikes. There is evidence, since this case was examined in 2018, of an increasing number of convictions and penal sanctions involving the obligation of compulsory work against trade unionists and activists in breach of Article 1 of the Convention. For example, Ms Tang Sorkbouy and six other union founders were dismissed on 31 October 2018, after having created a union at her company and demanding the improvement of working conditions. Although their complaint at the Arbitration Council resulted successfully in an award to reinstate the workers in February 2020, the company filed an appeal against this decision and refused the reinstatement.

In June 2020, the company filed a lawsuit against Ms Tang Sorkbouy on charges of forgery and breach of trust after nine years of employment. She was tried in absentia and sentenced by the Phnom Penh court of first instance to two years and six months imprisonment and a high fine. She had never received the summons to attend the court, allegedly due to discrepancies in the postal registration address. An appeal by her lawyer to the court of next instance in October 2020 was unsuccessful. The sentence was reduced to 18 months. We are very concerned to note an increase in cases in which union activists could not be dissuaded from their commitment by persecution for their union activities, but face serious criminal charges which force them to withdraw from their engagement.

We urgently call upon the Government to take all the necessary measures to ensure that criminal charges are not used to intimidate, convict and imprison labour and union activists for expressing views and exercising their rights, which makes the national law allowing forced labour in prison applicable to them, in violation of the Convention.

Government member, Canada – Canada takes note of the Government of Cambodia’s report and additional information provided earlier this week, which affirm that the freedom of citizens to express themselves peacefully and to engage in politics is guaranteed by Cambodia’s national legislation.

The findings presented by the Committee of Experts, however, describe the continued use of the provisions of the national legislation to arrest, prosecute and convict persons who express political or dissenting views, including those of opposition political party members, human rights defenders and journalists, leading to penalties such as imprisonment, which involves compulsory prison labour in violation of the Convention. The increasing prevalence of these actions is of particular concern to Canada in the lead up to Cambodia’s July 2023 national elections.

Canada strongly condemns the use of the national legislation to prosecute and convict political activists, journalists, human rights defenders and social media activists who express dissent or criticism of the authorities. In line with the recommendations of the Committee of Experts, Canada urges the Government of Cambodia to:

- review and revise the Act on Political Parties as well as the Criminal Code, by clearly restricting the scope of these provisions in connection with the use of violence or incitement to violence, and by repealing sanctions involving compulsory labour, so as to ensure that their application in practice does not lead to the violation of the Convention.

- take the necessary measures to ensure that the application of legislative provisions will not lead in practice to the imposition of sanctions involving compulsory labour, such as compulsory prison labour, on workers for the mere fact of organizing or peacefully participating in strikes.

We sincerely hope that the Government’s next report to the Committee of Experts will demonstrate positive developments.

Government member, Brunei Darussalam – I have the honour to deliver this statement on behalf of the Member States of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). We have taken note of the report of the Committee of Experts and the detail presented by the Royal Government of Cambodia.

We acknowledge and appreciate Cambodia’s progress made in advancing labour rights and are reassured by the fact that forced or compulsory labour finds no room in Cambodia, as enshrined in the two core Conventions. Cambodia’s strict prohibition of forced or compulsory labour which is upheld both in law and in practice is commendable.

We encourage the Royal Government of Cambodia to continue its endeavours towards the promotion of decent work, labour rights and improving working conditions. We also request the Committee to ensure a clear and impartial interpretation and application of the Conventions in question, thus eliminating any ambiguity that may lead to confusion between different labour Conventions.

Recognizing the critical role that social dialogue and tripartism play in fostering harmonious industrial relations, we encourage the Royal Government of Cambodia and its social partners to continue utilizing the social dialogue process at every level in order to promote the application of fundamental labour standards.

Interpretation from Chinese: Government member, China – We thank the representative of the Government of Cambodia for the detailed information. We have carefully read the report of the Committee of Experts. We note that the Government has earnestly fulfilled its obligations under the ratified Conventions and has made unrelenting efforts to this end. The Constitution clearly recognizes and protects human rights and Cambodia’s labour laws comply with international labour standards. They expressly prohibit forced or compulsory labour. The Cambodian Government ensures that no penalties involving compulsory labour may be imposed on persons who express political views opposed to the Cambodian political system. The Government actively cooperates with the ILO and submits relevant materials in a timely manner, which demonstrates the Government’s positive attitude of cooperation and dialogue. We appreciate this.

We believe that the consideration of the case should focus on Cambodia’s compliance with the Convention, rather than interfering in a country’s internal affairs, let alone politicizing technical issues. We call on this Committee to form a conclusion based on comprehensive and accurate facts and to objectively and fairly reflect the progress made by the Government in implementing the Convention, and finally to make a constructive decision to avoid interfering in a country’s sovereignty, legal system and internal affairs in a conclusion.

Government member, United States of America – We thank the Government of Cambodia for providing additional information to this Committee in response to the recent observations of the Committee of Experts. We note that the information provided relates to the use of several provisions of national legislation that allow for penalties of imprisonment and sanctions involving the obligation to work as a punishment for activities protected under the Convention.

Despite this information, we remain deeply concerned that workers, trade union leaders and other human rights defenders continue to be imprisoned and subjected to compulsory labour for exercising their fundamental principles and rights, including the right to strike. We note that the Committee of Experts deeply deplores the continued use of national legislation to arrest, prosecute and convict these individuals, leading to the imposition of penalties of imprisonment which involve compulsory prison labour.

We are also deeply concerned that nine members of the LRSU were convicted for incitement to commit a felony under sections 494 and 495 of the Cambodian Criminal Code on 25 May after engaging in a peaceful strike at a casino that began in December 2021, and pursuant to section 68 of the Act on Prisons of 2011, are subject while imprisoned to an obligation to work.

We urge the Government to take immediate action to implement the recent recommendations of the ILO supervisory bodies, prioritizing work in the following areas: first, ensure that no terms of imprisonment with punishments of forced labour are imposed for the peaceful exercise of trade union activities, such as participation in public and industrial strikes and protests, including in the case of the casino strike; and to that end, review and amend section 42 of the Act on Political Parties, as well as sections 445, 437 bis, 494, 495, 522 and 523 of the Criminal Code, to clearly restrict the scope of these provisions to apply only to situations connected with the use of violence or incitement to violence, or by repealing sanctions involving compulsory labour so as to ensure that their application in practice does not lead to the violation of the Convention.

We urge the Government of Cambodia to take all the necessary measures to address these long-standing issues, in compliance with the Convention. The United States remains committed to engaging with the Government to advance workers’ rights in Cambodia.

Worker member, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland – I speak on behalf of the Workers of the United Kingdom with the support of the IndustriALL Global Union. The Convention is essential to prevent forced labour or compulsory labour as a means of repressing government critics and punishing trade unionists for having participated in strikes. We note that prison sentences in Cambodia, in most cases, involve forced labour. The threat of a prison sentence, therefore, is a threat of forced labour, and the use of that threat to curtail trade union activities remains a breach of the Convention.

This case was double-footnoted by the Committee in 2018, and the Government was urged to take measures in law and practice to ensure that no penalties involving forced labour or compulsory labour may be imposed. Despite that, on 11 December that year, six national trade union leaders were each sentenced to two-and-a-half-years suspended jail sentences for taking part in strikes demanding higher statutory minimum wages in 2013. They were prosecuted in 2014 on multiple charges of committing acts of violence, damage to property and traffic obstructions, later changed to instigation, which encompass a broader scope under section 28 of the Criminal Code. These suspended sentences also included a collective fine of approximately US$6,800, which effectively stopped them from engaging in labour strikes and protests. The appeal court eventually acquitted them on 28 May 2019.

Employers have pursued a similar pattern of judicial harassment, filing criminal lawsuits with criminal charges under sections 217, 218 and 411 of the Criminal Code for their involvement in wage strikes in the garment sector between 2013 and 2014. This has been a significant problem in the country’s garment sector.

For example, two unionists were convicted of intentional violence with aggravating circumstances (sections 217 and 218 of the Criminal Code), after a 2013 strike in a garment company. They too were sentenced to a suspended prison sentence, in December 2018. The same month, nine trade unionists had their charges of intentional violence with aggravating circumstances dropped by the court following a 2014 strike. Two, however, received a suspended sentence, which they appealed in 2019.

Finally, again in December’s flurry of punitive activity, seven trade unionists, including two from the Coalition of Cambodian Apparel Workers Democratic Unions (C.CAWDU) garment union, were charged with aggravating circumstances (section 411 of the Criminal Code) after supporting striking workers demanding better working conditions. They received another suspended sentence and a massive fine (US$8.5 million). Again, given the flimsy nature of the accusations, the workers sought to appeal in 2019. These criminal sanctions provide for a penalty of imprisonment of between one and five years and were clearly used to convict trade unionists for their participation in strikes, something covered by Article 1(d) of the Convention. Even suspended sentences therefore serve to intimidate Cambodian workers and control their freedom to carry out their legitimate activities, including to participate in strikes, with the threat of compulsory work under section 68 of the Act. This is a clear breach of the Convention.

Worker member, Italy – I am speaking on behalf of Italian unions: the Italian General Confederation of Labour (CGIL), the Italian Confederation of Trade Unions (CISL) and the Italian Labour Union (UIL). Italian workers are concerned at the imprisonment of trade unionists and escalating judicial harassment against civil society activists who are defending the rights and interests of the communities they represent.

The Government of Cambodia is increasingly resorting to the use of penalties of imprisonment under the Criminal Code and other laws against trade unionists and activists in situations covered by Article 1 of the Convention. For example, Tep Sopha, a member of the Farmers Association for Peace and Development was convicted of criminal offences and obstruction of public officers in a lawsuit brought by the Ministry of the Environment because he was organizing farmers in a protest in Sihanoukville to dispute the designated conservation lands which are traditionally the homeland of these farmers. He was sent to prison for one year on 23 January 2019.

Seb Thon and ten other members of the organization were sued by a landowner for intentional damage and assaults during a protest by farmers against land grabbing in December 2019. He was given a suspended sentence of one year in prison and a fine. There has been no progress on his appeal to the court since 2020.

Following the prosecution of Rong Chhun, President of the CCU, in July 2020 on incitement charges for making a public statement on the loss of land by farmers, the Ministry of the Interior and the police authorities took action to arrest and charge ten civil society and youth activists under sections 494 and 495 of the Criminal Code. They were released from detention in November 2021 on probation. In 2021, four activists from an environmental organization, Mother Nature, were arrested and charged for insulting the King and plotting. In November 2022, a forestry activist was sentenced to five years of imprisonment under section 97 of the Act on Forestry. In May 2023, land rights activists from the Coalition of Cambodian Farmer Community were arrested after their internal project planning workshop.

We urge the Government to drop all the pending charges and cease to use custodial penalties involving compulsory work and forced labour on trade unionists and activists who are simply exercising their fundamental rights and freedoms.

Observer, International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers’ Associations (IUF) – I am speaking here today to raise the matter of the arbitrary arrest and detention of several members of our affiliate in Cambodia, the LRSU. The arrests included its President Chhim Sithar. The arrests were conducted following a peaceful strike in opposition to repeated acts of union-busting at their employer in Phnom Penh. They are being punished for participation in a strike, contrary to Article 1(d) of the Convention.

In January 2022, several UN Special Rapporteurs denounced their arrests, finding that “many of the arrests of the mostly women strikers were conducted in a violent way and appear to contravene the freedoms of association, assembly and expression”. The union activists were charged with so called “incitement to commit a felony” under sections 494 and 495 of the Cambodian Criminal Code. The previous ILO Director‑General, Guy Ryder, had appealed to the Prime Minister of the country “to use his powers to ensure the immediate release from custody of all detained workers and the dropping of all criminal charges related to their trade union activity”.

Last month, a court found nine leaders of the LRSU guilty, including its President Chhim Sithar, who was sentenced to two years in prison, eight months of which she has already served. Five others were given sentences of one-and-a-half years, and three were given one-year suspended sentences. As the Committee of Experts has previously noted, penalties of imprisonment include the imposition of compulsory labour.

We condemn the imprisonment of our members for their trade union activity, and the complete lack of due process and the right to a fair trial to defend themselves against baseless charges. We echo the words of the Committee of Experts, which has found “that there has been no progress with regard to protecting freedom of expression in Cambodia” and “deeply deplores the continued use of the provisions of the national legislation”, including the Criminal Code, “to prosecute and convict persons who express their political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, leading to penalties of imprisonment involving compulsory prison labour”.

We reiterate the conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association, which in March 2023 recalled “that no one should be deprived of their freedom or be subject to penal sanctions for the mere fact of organizing or participating in a peaceful strike”, and request the Government to ensure that all charges brought against LRSU leaders and members for participating in a peaceful strike are dropped. We urge the Government of Cambodia to immediately release LRSU President Chhim Sithar and all the members of the LRSU who are in prison, and indeed to release all persons who are arbitrarily imprisoned.

Observer, International Transport Workers Federation (ITF) – Article 1(d) of the Convention explicitly prohibits recourse to sanctions involving any form of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for having participated in strikes, that is sanctions involving compulsory labour for the mere fact of organizing or participating in strikes. Yet, provisions of the Cambodian Criminal Code carrying such penalties are regularly used to target trade unionists taking lawful strike action.

Convictions under relevant provisions of the Criminal Code can lead to compulsory labour by virtue of section 68 of the Act on Prisons. This is not just about rehabilitation of prisoners. Section 71 of the Act on Prisons allows the Director of Prisons to enter into contracts with private parties to generate employment for the prison industry, handicraft and farming programmes, and to enter into contracts to sell the products from these programmes. Private entities can profit from compulsory prison labour. This in itself is a violation of Convention No. 29. The criminalization of strikes with the possibility of compulsory labour is exacerbated by the constant judicial harassment of trade unionists by employers and strike-breakers, and the ambiguous criminal justice process. Convictions carrying penalties of compulsory labour for participating in strikes also create an atmosphere of intimidation and fear prejudicial to freedom of association.

The Committee of Experts has highlighted the cases of transport workers Van Narong and Pel Voeun, who were convicted of criminal defamation pursuant to sections 311 and 312 of the Criminal Code and sentenced to six months in prison. It is important to understand the facts of this case to fully comprehend the matter. Following a 2015 strike by workers of a major bus company, two union leaders were detained after they were themselves attacked by members of a tuk-tuk and moto-taxi association. They were arrested on trumped-up charges of aggravated intentional violence and obstructing public officials under the Criminal Code but were later released. The matter did not end there. The bus company filed a lawsuit alleging the same offences against both of them and four leaders of the CLC, who were not even present during the protest. Other criminal lawsuits by the bus company, strike-breakers and counter-protestors ensued, involving a total of 46 trade unionists. Two of the trade unionists in question were Van Narong and Pel Voeun. Although the Government claims that the two are currently on bail pending appeal, this only offers them limited comfort, knowing that they may be convicted for crimes they did not commit which could result in compulsory prison labour.

We call on Cambodia to comply with Article 1(d) of the Convention and end the imposition of sanctions involving compulsory prison labour on workers participating in strikes.

Government representative – My delegation wishes to extend our appreciation to all speakers and delegates for their constructive interventions and insightful comments. We again wish to reaffirm Cambodia’s unwavering commitment to honour the Convention in respect of the abolition of forced labour in our nation. Contrary to the allegations of other delegations, Cambodia always commits to the promotion and protection of human rights. Freedom of assembly, association and expression for individuals and civil societies are guaranteed in the Kingdom, as enshrined in the Constitution and other international instruments. As a country that steadfastly upholds the rule of law, strengthening the implementation of laws and regulations is fundamental to our good governance. Any attempts to mischaracterize law enforcement activities as political pressure would undermine the rule of law. As such, we are compelled to clarify that certain individuals, who were associated with strike activities, were apprehended not merely due to their involvement in illegal strikes, but rather that their acts caused substantial disturbance to public order and security, as well as infringing the right to life of others, particularly amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Currently, these cases are pending further legal proceedings before the courts.

We affirm that forced labour is entirely incompatible with our values and has no foothold in the Kingdom. To this day, there remains no substantiated evidence of compulsory prison labour being used as a punitive measure for individuals who merely expressed their political views or views opposed to the established system, or are involved in strikes in Cambodia. Accordingly, in the absence of evidence in respect of forced labour, we question the validity of our footnoted status. In fact, prison labour is primarily a rehabilitative process aimed at facilitating the reintegration of prisoners into society and the labour market. Under the Act on Prisons, “low-risk” convicted individuals possessing the requisite physical capabilities may be called upon to engage in work as part of the prison daily routine, or to perform tasks benefiting the community or participate in prison industry, prison handicraft, and the prison farming industry. Such employment is not assigned based on political opposition, human rights advocacy or journalistic activity, and safety measures are diligently implemented. However, we observe with regret that a handful of delegates have attempted to exploit and politicize this discussion in favour of a group of individuals who were prosecuted for a conspiracy to overthrow a legitimately elected government. In this case, we are therefore compelled to stress that such an offence goes beyond criminality; it is a direct affront against the people and the very essence of democracy. Indeed, a crime is a crime, and it cannot be justified for other aspirations. All charges are imposed in response to constitutional and criminal breaches, not political or fabricated motives.

As for the freedoms of expression and the press, they remain alive and dynamic in the Kingdom. The licence-revoked media outlet grossly breached the profession of journalism by engaging in spreading fake news. As such, the move against an unprofessional media outlet did not undermine the freedom of the vibrant press or freedom of expression in the Kingdom but contributes to the strengthening of the journalism profession. Indeed, it is no surprise that some delegates are exploring and exploiting all ways and means to put Cambodia on the international radar. A simple answer is because we will have general elections in July this year. They have no shame, even breaking rules and practices to demonize our Government. Certain issues, such as the dissolution of a political party, the disqualification of a political party to participate in the July elections and the licence-revoked media outlet are not covered by the agenda items today or the Convention. Therefore we remind delegates that politicization not only hinders productive dialogue, but also threatens the integrity and mandate of this Committee.

In closing, my delegation wishes to extend our heartfelt gratitude to the Committee for its observation, and to all ASEAN Member States, distinguished delegates, workers’ and employers’ representatives, and others for their invaluable interventions and support extended to Cambodia throughout this process.

Employer members – The Employer members thank the various speakers that took the floor and notably the Government of Cambodia for their interventions and the information they provided. We remind the Committee that the Convention is a fundamental Convention, which therefore requires special consideration by ILO Governments, workers and employers. Our position on this case is aligned with the recommendations of the Committee of Experts. The Employer members stand against any form of unlawful restriction on freedom of expression and connected fundamental rights. But we do reiterate our earlier point, which is that before making findings, we need to investigate all of the circumstances, and hence the call for more information on aspects such as the imprisonment of various people. With all of those things in mind, the Employer members recommend that the Government of Cambodia take immediate and effective measures:

- to ensure that persons who express political views, or views opposed to the established system, are not punished with sanctions including compulsory labour, contrary to Article 1(a) of the Convention, and that the application of legislative provisions does not lead in practice to the imposition of sanctions on workers for the mere fact of organizing, or peacefully participating in strikes contrary to Article 1(d) of the Convention;

- to review the wording of the relevant sections of the Criminal Code and the Act on Political Parties, by restricting the scope to situations involving the use of violence, or incitement to violence, or by repealing sanctions involving compulsory labour;

- to provide copies of the amendments to the 2018 Criminal Code, which criminalized criticism of the King, as well as information on the practical application of the relevant national provisions of the Criminal Code and Act on Political Parties;

- to provide a copy of the court decision regarding the arrest and prosecution of the four trade union leaders accused of having organized an illegal strike.

Finally, noting the lack of progress regarding the protection of freedom of expression and that no ILO technical assistance has yet been requested, we call on the Government once again to avail itself of technical assistance from the ILO to assist in implementing these recommendations. We count on the Government to provide the requested information by 1 September this year, and to adopt the measures indicated by this Committee in a timely manner.

Worker members – We regret the criticisms made concerning the independent and impartial choice of the Committee of Experts, in accordance with its mandate, to select the case of Cambodia for a double footnote on the basis of the objective criteria recalled in paragraph 144 of its report. The Committee of Experts also explains the reasons for the selection of the case as a double-footnoted case.

We have also heard attempts to justify the prosecution and imprisonment of trade unions with reference to provisions of the national Criminal Code. On this subject, the Workers’ group wishes to insist on the caution that needs to be exercised by everyone when referring to national penal legislation to justify the prosecution and imprisonment of members of workers’ and employers’ organizations for the mere fact of having exercised their rights and civil liberties as set out in the Convention.

The violations of the Convention by the Government of Cambodia have already been discussed by the Committee in 2018. The more general context of flagrant violations of civil liberties, including trade union freedoms, has long given rise to deep-rooted concerns in the Workers’ group.

We have noted during our discussion that the situation in the country has not improved, quite the contrary. We are unfortunately bound to repeat most of our recommendations to the Government of Cambodia. In 2018, Cambodia was already the subject of a double footnote, which further reinforces our concerns at the gravity of the situation.

More recently, in 2021, the Committee also examined the application by Cambodia of Convention No. 87. Following that examination, a direct contacts mission was organized in 2022. The problems examined on that occasion are closely related to the examination of compliance with the Convention by Cambodia and we call on the Government of Cambodia to give effect to the recommendations made by that mission.

The Government is today under an obligation to make a commitment to take all the necessary legislative measures to ensure that sentences involving compulsory labour are not imposed with a view to silencing and censuring the peaceful expression of political opinions. The right of assembly is the means through which citizens can endeavour to ensure the dissemination and acceptance of their views and must therefore also be protected.

Moreover, Article 1(d) of the Convention prohibits the imposition of compulsory labour as a punishment for the organization of or peaceful participation in strikes. The Government must ensure that freedom of association can be exercised in a climate free from intimidation and violence. All persons who have been imprisoned for exercising their right to freedom of expression and of assembly must be released immediately and unconditionally. The prosecutions and convictions handed down must be abandoned. These matters are also the subject of a complaint to the Committee on Freedom of Association, which issued its report in March 2023. We call on the Government to give effect to the recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association.

Institutional reforms are also required to guarantee the independence and impartiality of the judiciary. Freedom of expression and of peaceful assembly, freedom of association and protection against arbitrary arrest must be guaranteed as a safeguard against the imposition of compulsory labour as a result of the exercise of these rights. That requires the firm commitment to engage in wide-ranging legislative reforms in relation to certain laws that are manifestly not in conformity with the Convention.

In particular, this will involve reviewing the following legislative provisions in order to bring them into full conformity with the requirements of the Convention:

- section 42 of the Act on Political Parties, as amended in 2017, under which various offences related to the administration or management of a political party which has been dissolved, or whose activities have been suspended by a court, or whose registration has been refused, are punishable by imprisonment of up to one year;

- sections 494 and 495 on incitement to disturb public security by speech, writing, images or any other audio-visual communication in public or to the public;

- section 522 on the publication of commentaries intended to unlawfully coerce judicial authorities;

- section 523 of the Criminal Code of 2009 on discrediting judicial decisions;

- sections 305 to 309 on public defamation and insult; and

- sections 445 and 437 bis of the Criminal Code relating to insult and criticism of the King.

Freedom of expression and of assembly, the right to collective action and the right not to be subject to forced or compulsory labour are extremely important matters for workers, as well as for the values of the ILO as a whole.

The Government must therefore work with the ILO to give full effect to the Convention. A double footnote means that the Committee of Experts is seriously concerned. The Worker members have referred in this respect to section 68 of the Act on Prisons, under which detainees deemed to be physically fit must be assigned to daily prison work, and have expressed opposition to the request for comments on the Act on Trade Unions and the Bill on the minimum wage to be removed from the record.

We invite the Government of Cambodia to avail itself of ILO technical assistance for the implementation of all these recommendations. In view of the gravity of the situation, we also call on the Government to accept a visit by a high-level tripartite mission.

Conclusions of the Committee

The Committee took note of the written and oral information provided by the Government and the discussion that followed.

The Committee deeply deplored the continued use of the provisions of the national legislation, including the Penal Code, to prosecute and convict persons who express their political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, or to punish those who participate in strikes, leading to penalties of imprisonment involving compulsory prison labour.

The Committee expressed deep concern at the arrest and imprisonment of trade unionists and others for exercising their civil liberties and expressing different political views from that of the Government.

Taking into account the discussion, the Committee urges the Government to take effective and time-bound measures to:

- ensure that the right to hold or express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system without the threat of penalties involving compulsory labour is fully respected;

- ensure that that the application of legislative provisions do not contravene Article 1 of the Convention by the imposition of sanctions involving compulsory labour;

- repeal or amend relevant provisions of the Penal Code and the Act on Political Parties providing for and leading to penalties of compulsory labour, in consultation with the social partners, in order to bring them into conformity with the Convention;

- immediately and unconditionally release, quash convictions and drop all charges brought against individuals for having expressed political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, who were punished for having participated in strikes;

- ensure access to effective judicial remedies for victims of compulsory labour in violation of the Convention;

- implement the recommendations related to the matters under the Convention made by the direct contacts mission that took place in March–April 2022 under Convention No. 87; and

- develop an action plan, in consultation with the social partners, to implement these recommendations without delay.

The Committee requests the Government to provide any relevant information requested by the Committee of Experts before 1 September 2023 together with detailed information on the measures taken to implement these recommendations.

The Committee invites the Government to avail itself of ILO technical assistance to effectively implement all of the Committee’s recommendations.

CMNT_TITLE_CAS



A Government representative stated that the Committee of Experts had played a crucial role in ensuring the fulfilment of all international labour Conventions, as well as other relevant international human rights instruments. The Government of Cambodia had also been committed to do its utmost to respect all its international obligations. As enshrined in the Constitution, both labour rights and human rights were protected in law and in practice in Cambodia. Forced labour was explicitly prohibited under section 15 of the Labour Law. Referring to the definition of forced labour under the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), as well as to its exceptions, the speaker highlighted that the Law on Prisons aimed at providing education, reformation and rehabilitation to prisoners to reintegrate them into society, to prevent the recurrence of offences and to offer safe and secure custody, good health and humane treatment of prisoners in accordance with international principles and the United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of Liberty. Section 68 of the Law on Prisons incorporated all international standards and best practices applied in some developed countries on the use of the prison industry. Therefore, it was inappropriate to interpret that provision to be in violation of Conventions Nos 29 and 105. Section 68 provided that low-risk prisoners who had been assessed as physically capable should be assigned to work as part of the prison’s daily routine, or to perform any work in the public interest and for the benefit of the community, or assigned to participate in the prison industry, prison handicraft and prison farming programmes. The speaker expressed his grave concern at the Committee of Experts’ comments and conclusions on the application of Convention No 105. Regarding the request for updated information concerning the situation of freedom of association in Cambodia and the roadmap to deal with this issue, the speaker provided assurances that such information would be provided. He stressed that, as the national elections were forthcoming, the situation was heavily politicized. Moreover, some non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and civil society had no hesitation to discredit, demonize and ultimately to destroy the Royal Government of Cambodia and the ruling party whose achievements unquestionably satisfied all Cambodian people.

The Employer members pointed out that the application of Convention No. 105 by Cambodia was being discussed by this Committee for the first time. There were only two relevant observations made by the Committee of Experts in respect of Cambodia’s compliance with the Convention, one in 2015 and the other in 2017. The observations referred to the inconsistent application of the Penal Code of 2009 and reported instances of political figures and trade unionists held in custody for offences for which the Code mandated only a fine. No mention of any person subjected to conditions of forced labour while in detention was made. For a breach of the Convention to occur, however, it was necessary to point to instances of persons being subjected to banned activities. In the absence of such evidence clearly pointing to a breach of the Convention, a case should not be discussed by the Committee, nor be double-footnoted. It was not sufficient to assume that detention in itself connoted forced labour. The fact that detention may or may not have been legal was not material to the question of whether the Convention had been breached. The observations that formed the background to this case drew heavily on the 2014, 2016 and 2017 reports of the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia. These reports drew attention to, and expressed deep concern about, human rights issues in Cambodia. These issues were of concern to all and the Employer members were conscious of the strategic regional and global concerns and calls for pressure to be brought to bear on Cambodia in this respect. However, this Committee should not permit itself to be used as a vehicle of wider concerns, be they in respect of Cambodia or in any other situation. The mandate and the duty of the Committee was to examine cases of breaches of ratified Conventions, not to pursue issues more properly dealt with in other jurisdictions. Thus, the conclusions on this case should be limited to observing that the inconsistent application by Cambodia of the Penal Code created risks that a detained person may be subjected to pressures involving forms of forced labour. In the absence of evidence pointing to such instances, this Committee should limit itself to asking the Government for an assurance that no persons, detained or not, were or would be subjected to conditions of forced labour. That was the approach adopted by the Committee of Experts in its 2015 observation when it had requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that no sanctions involving compulsory labour could be imposed as a punishment for holding or expressing political views. It was arguably not within the competence of this Committee to develop conclusions on practices that, while of concern in themselves, were not breaches of a labour standard ratified by Cambodia.

The Worker members recalled that Cambodia’s serious failure to respect fundamental rights and principles at work had been examined by the Committee almost every year for the past decade, unfortunately with very disappointing results. The Committee of Experts had double footnoted this case due to its concern over the legislative and practical measures undertaken by the Government and there were no reasons to call that decision into question. Basic civil rights, including the right to free speech and the right to associate and assemble, were not guaranteed in the country. On the contrary, workers and citizens were systematically subjected to heavy criminal penalties involving compulsory labour for exercising their rights protected under the Convention. Recourse to sanctions involving forced labour or compulsory labour as a means to censor the expression of opposing views on political, social or economic matters or to punish participation in strikes was clearly prohibited under Article 1 of the Convention. The right to associate and assemble provided the means through which citizens sought to secure the dissemination and acceptance of their views and thus clearly fell under the remit of protection provided by the Convention. Yet trade union leaders and members were effectively barred from enjoying these rights. This Committee and other ILO supervisory bodies had repeatedly condemned the imprisonment of Cambodian trade unionists for expressing their views and engaging in peaceful activities, including strikes. The Worker members deeply regretted that, despite very clear recommendations to the Government, the crackdown on trade unionists continued. The number of trade unionists facing criminal charges or imprisonment in reprisal for peaceful trade union activities was steadily increasing. The Cambodian Labour Confederation alone counted at least 26 leaders and members who were currently threatened with criminal punishment for expressing their views on problematic social and economic policies. Recently passed labour laws or those that were under discussion seemed to be designed to tighten the grip on trade unionists even further. The Committee of Experts and also the UN treaty bodies, had criticized the 2016 Law on Trade Unions and the 2015 Law on Associations and Non-Governmental Organizations (LANGO), which effectively denied freedom of association rights to teachers, civil servants and domestic workers. Despite the amendments made to the draft Minimum Wage Law, the Law remained problematic particularly as it prohibited the dissemination of research on wages, which had not been submitted to the National Tripartite Council within 15 days. This restriction could have a severe impact on academic freedom, and economists and academics could be potentially restricted in their ability to disseminate, access and discuss vital research on economic and social issues. Moreover, the draft Law provided for heavy and disproportionate administrative fines with no explicit right of appeal. These fines, if unpaid, would lead to criminal proceedings. Considering the likely inability of many workers and union leaders to afford heavy fines, these provisions cumulatively would lead to the effective criminalization of the peaceful exercise of fundamental freedoms. These issues were clearly connected to last year’s discussion with respect to the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87). In its conclusions, the Committee called on the Government to ensure that freedom of association could be exercised in a climate free of intimidation and violence against workers, employers and their respective organizations. It also requested the Government to hold consultations with its social partners in order to develop a time-bound roadmap for the implementation of the recommendations. In its engagements with the direct contacts mission which visited the country in March 2017, the Government admitted that the Law on Trade Unions was defective in many ways. It was therefore disappointing that, even though the recommendations were issued one year ago, the Government only started to hold consultations a few weeks ago. The Government should explain what caused this excessive delay and how it intended to overcome its tardiness.

The Worker members expressed their deep concern at the deteriorating political and social atmosphere, including the prosecution and imprisonment of political opponents and human rights defenders. While the offences of public defamation and insult under the Penal Code were punishable with fines only, the law had been applied in an arbitrary manner in order to punish political opponents and human rights defenders with penalties of imprisonment. The UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia had noted that the range of provisions in the Penal Code used to curtail freedom of expression was ever-increasing and insisted that laws must be applied consistently by the Government and the courts. The Rapporteur had warned that the criminal punishment of activists may create an atmosphere of fear and intimidation that could negatively affect the right to freedom of expression, leading to self-censorship. Moreover, the clampdown on trade unions and civil society activists had coincided with the dissolution of the main opposition party, the Cambodian National Rescue Party (CNRP), by the Supreme Court. While the Law on Political Parties was amended in 2017, it retained its problematic provisions. Various offences related to the administration or management of a political party which had been dissolved, or whose activities had been suspended by a court, or whose registration had been refused, were punishable with sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year, which involved compulsory labour. A total of 118 CNRP members had been banned from political activity for five years. It was impossible not to share the Committee of Experts’ deep concern over the wide-scale detentions and prosecutions targeting the opposition party, civil society and trade unions. The absence of legal guarantees of freedom of expression, freedom of peaceful assembly, freedom of association, as well as freedom from arbitrary arrest, clearly exposed workers and citizens to the imposition of compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political or ideological views. In light of the lack of independence of the judiciary, as noted in 2008 by the direct contacts mission, this was of particular concern. The ability of the judicial system to discharge its mandate was compromised by the lack of capacity; the judiciary was subject to political interference, which compromised its ability to exercise its functions in an impartial and independent manner. The UN Special Rapporteur had noted that access to justice was still denied to many, and expressed concern at the prevalence and excessive length of pre-trial detention. Criminal proceedings were marred by inconsistencies and irregularities; different judges applied different standards of proof. This practice stood in contradiction with the principle that everyone charged with a criminal offence had the right to know and challenge the evidence against him or her. Consistency and fairness, especially in criminal cases, required that the standard of proof must be the same in all similar cases. The general elections were imminent in Cambodia. Fundamental freedoms and the rule of law would be meaningless if they were not upheld during times of contentious debate. Freedom of expression and freedom of association were crucial to democracy, social progress and inclusive economic growth. Restricting these rights under the threat of compulsory labour constituted not only a denial of basic freedoms but represented a serious stumbling block in the country’s path to democracy and prosperity.

The Employer member of Cambodia considered that anything not related to the application of Convention No. 105, such as matters relating to the Minimum Wage Law, the Law on Trade Unions, sanctions of imprisonment or any other sanction except that of forced labour, should be struck from the Record of Proceedings as not being relevant to the case. The discussion of this case should be limited to forced labour. As there was no evidence of a clear breach of the Convention, it was unacceptable that Cambodia was discussed by the Committee yet again. She highlighted the impact the discussion in this case could have on the decision of other governments and businesses to engage with and invest in Cambodia. The mere discussion of this case under Convention No. 105 would tell the world (or strongly imply) that Cambodia engaged in forced labour. This was not the case as there was no evidence presented to that effect. The Cambodian employers had a deep interest in the work of the Committee to address challenges to the application of Conventions. They were present to address challenges to protect their business and investment environment. Cambodia had a vibrant and dynamic economic environment that was changing and diversifying quickly. The engagement of governments and investors around the world was necessary for the growth and creation of good quality jobs in Cambodia. Every country deserved a fair and due process of review by the Committee of Experts. However, Cambodia had been unfairly sanctioned with a double footnote. The evaluation of the Committee of Experts demonstrated that there was no breach of the Convention, only possibilities which were the same for other countries with similar legislation. The Conference Committee should review only the most serious breaches of Conventions. A key outcome of the discussion in this case should be a call to review the transparency and integrity of the double-footnoting procedures.

The Worker member of Cambodia affirmed that the leaders and members of the independent trade unions still faced serious problems including murder, detention, discrimination, violence and punishment when they were trying to exercise their rights. In 2004, Chea Vichea, Ros Sovanareth and Hy Vuthy had been murdered. In 2013, during a general strike demanding a higher minimum wage for garment workers, five workers had been killed, 23 workers had been jailed for months, and more than 30 others had been injured. The right to public assemblies and strikes had been restricted and unions could only meet members in private places. The criminal charges against six union leaders for taking part in the 2013 strikes were still effective. The Government was requested to drop the charges against them, to enforce the recommendations of the Committee and provide the reports of the three committees charged with investigations of the murders and violence in the 2013 strike, with the purpose of bringing the perpetrators to justice and compensating victims. Between 2014 and 2017, union leaders and thousands of workers were faced with violence from third parties or the police when they exercised their rights in industrial actions, 26 workers had faced criminal charges and 17 of them had been jailed from two to eight months. The unions had brought these cases to the Committee in 2016 and 2017. The Committee had specifically asked the Government to resolve these cases, but there had been no progress and in one case new charges had been put up against the leaders. Following the recommendations made by the Committee, the Government had committed itself to enforce them with a roadmap of concrete actions and two consultations had been carried out. The speaker invited the Government to finalize a time-bound roadmap to amend the Law on Trade Unions and the LANGO so as to bring them into conformity with the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and to amend the Penal Code and the Law on Peaceful Demonstration to bring them into conformity with Convention No. 105.

The Government member of Bulgaria, speaking on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its Member States, as well the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro and Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Norway, referred to the EU’s promotion of the core labour standards as part of its 2015 Action Plan on Human Rights, which featured the eradication of forced labour and the protection of freedom of association and the right to organize. Cambodia had benefited from the duty-free and quota-free access to European markets through the “Everything But Arms” (EBA) arrangement under the Generalised Scheme of Preferences. The EU was the largest market for Cambodia’s exports, especially for the garment sector. In return, the EBA regime required Cambodia to comply with its obligations under the core international human rights principles and labour Conventions, to which the EU and its citizens attached great importance. The speaker recalled that the EU had expressed its concern over the deterioration of democracy, human rights and the rule of law. The inclusion of penalties of imprisonment involving compulsory labour in provisions that had been used to target those expressing dissenting political or ideological views was also a matter of great concern. These included the relevant provisions of the Law on Political Parties of 2007 and the Penal Code related to incitement to disturb public security by speech, writing, picture or any audiovisual communication in public or to the public, publication of commentaries intended to unlawfully coerce judicial authorities, and discrediting judicial decisions. The speaker requested the Government to ensure that these provisions were used only when fully justified by the facts of the case and only in connection with violence or incitement to violence. The application of the Penal Code, the Law on Trade Unions, the LANGO and the Law on Peaceful Demonstration should not lead in practice to punishment involving compulsory labour in situations covered by Convention No. 105. No penalties involving compulsory labour should be imposed for the peaceful expression of political views or views opposed to the established system. She strongly urged the Government to cease using the judiciary as a political tool to harass, intimidate, arrest and prosecute political opponents, trade union members, members of civil society, labour rights activists and human rights defenders. It was the EU’s intention to closely monitor the situation, while remaining ready to assist Cambodia in meeting obligations linked to democratization, human rights and the rule of law, and in supporting its economic and sustainable development.

The Government member of Thailand, speaking on behalf of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), reaffirmed their strong commitment to the elimination of forced labour, in keeping with the ASEAN Labour Ministers’ Work Programme 2016–20, and the Work Plans of the Subsidiary Bodies. ASEAN member States looked forward to their continued cooperation with the ILO in implementing regional commitment to its goals. The speaker welcomed the progress that had been made in promoting labour rights and the Government’s assurance that forced labour had been strictly prohibited both in law and in practice. He encouraged the Government to continue its efforts to promote labour rights, decent working conditions and harmonious industrial relations through social dialogue.

The Worker member of Germany, speaking on behalf of the German Confederation of Trade Unions (DGB) and the Dutch, Danish, Finnish, Norwegian and Swedish trade unions, stated that the Cambodian Government was violating this Convention in law and in practice. Section 68 of the Law on Prisons provided explicitly that prisoners could be obliged to perform compulsory labour. The Government used imprisonment as a deliberate means to obstruct the activity of trade unionists and to penalize activities which were critical of the Government. Legal provisions that forbade insulting the monarchy, incitement to crime or to the disturbance of public order, defamation, bribery of witnesses or damaging national interests were systematically misused. The improper use of these provisions of criminal law was particularly problematic. Through the formulation of a very extensive scope of application, these legal provisions were used inappropriately to strategically intimidate and repress opponents of the regime. A trade union activist was sentenced in 2017 to two years’ imprisonment for incitement to serious crime because he had called, in a radio interview, for the removal of trade preferences by the United States and the EU, and journalists had been charged with defamation because they had asked the inhabitants of a village about their voting behaviour. Pre-trial detention was also being used arbitrarily for long periods of time and without due legal process. The arbitrary misuse of prison sentences, which were always accompanied by compulsory labour under the existing legislation, created a climate of threats and intimidation, in which it was impossible not only for trade unionists but also for civil society as a whole to exercise fundamental rights such as freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and freedom of association – human rights which were protected as a matter of principle by the Cambodian Constitution. She called upon the Government to bring both its law and its practice into line with this Convention and to put an end to the repression of trade unionists and dissidents.

The Worker member of Indonesia, speaking on behalf of the Confederation of Indonesia Prosperity Trade Union (KSBSI) and the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU), insisted that no worker should be charged or arrested for legitimate activities. He noted the Committee of Expert’s concern that trade union members, human rights defenders and NGO representatives continued to be subjected to threats, harassment, arrest, pre-detention and prosecution on charges of defamation and public insult. Although under the Penal Code, those offences were punishable only by fines, various trade union members had received penalties of imprisonment. The speaker highlighted instances of arbitrary and repressive application of criminal laws where workers had protested unfair dismissals of trade union leaders or failure to enforce arbitral awards and court orders. On 14 February 2018, four union leaders of the Workers Friendship Union Federation were summoned to court and sent for pre-trial detention for having organized a strike. In 71 instances since the last national election in 2014, trade unionists had been taken to court by employers and authorities for such criminal offences as defamation, intentional violence and damage, or interfering with traffic during labour protests. Under the Penal Code, they could receive prison terms ranging from six months to five years. A coordinator of the agricultural association was jailed for six months under articles 377 and 378 of the Penal Code, which provided for penalties of imprisonment from six months to three years, and fines from 1 million to 6 million riels. On 6 February 2016 protest against the 2015 dismissal of 45 employees attempting to form a branch of the Cambodian Transport Workers Federation had ended with a violent attack in which bus drivers had been arrested and 14 people injured. An officer of the Cambodia Informal Worker Association had been arrested on charges of aggravated intentional violence, obstructing public officials and obstructing a public road. On the same day, four leaders of independent trade unions, including Ath Thorn, President of the Cambodian Labour Confederation had also been charged, although none had been present. The speaker underscored the need to stop the misuse of laws to criminalize workers and trade unionists. He called on the Government to take urgent, concrete action to comply with the Committee of Expert’s call to fully respect trade union rights and to ensure trade unionists’ ability to act in a climate free of intimidation or violence.

The Government member of Switzerland expressed deep concern at the detention measures, treatment and judicial processes to which members of the opposition party, NGO representatives, trade union members and human rights defenders were subject. They had been punished and imprisoned for their activities, and their prison sentences included an obligation to work while in prison. In that regard, he called on the Government of Cambodia to take the necessary steps to guarantee freedom of opinion and expression, freedom of association and the right to peaceful assembly. Those rights were an integral part of the human rights framework and enshrined in the fundamental labour Conventions. He also encouraged the Government to undertake all the legal changes needed to abolish sentences that included an obligation to work, in order to comply with this Convention.

The Worker member of France said that the violations of Convention No. 105 were part of an arbitrary practice that was contrary to all values of humanism and respect for universal human dignity, in view of the fact that through the LANGO law, the Government of Cambodia was using extremely coercive measures including forced labour as a means of intimidation and retaliation. The general requirement of NGO neutrality towards political parties under section 24 of the LANGO law allowed arbitrary interpretations by the administration, which sought to suspend activities, impose fines and cancel the registration of NGOs. The same provision also authorized the Ministry of the Interior to cancel registration following an extremely vague allegation of endangering public and national safety. Accordingly, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had ordered the National Democratic Institute (NDI) to close and to expel all its foreign staff on 23 August 2017. The Foreign Ministry had asserted its authority on the basis of section 34 of the LANGO to put an end to the activities of any international civil society organization that had not registered a memorandum of understanding with the Ministry. The order had come after the NDI had been accused of providing the Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP) with a “malicious” plan to overthrow the Government. Moreover, on 28 July 2017, the governor of the Ek Phnom district in Battambang published a letter ordering all commune chiefs in that district to report on all NGOs and associations operating in the region. The letter indicated that organizations needed to obtain the permission of the district authorities before conducting activities in that district. Commune chiefs were required to publish reports on NGOs and associations which were active in that district. The letter also indicated that commune chiefs who failed to report such information would incur penalties, and that was what the Cambodian Government was using as a means of intimidation. The grounds for charges under the LANGO were vague, subject to interpretation and thus entirely devoid of neutrality and objectivity. NGOs and civil society organizations must now submit annual reports to the Minister of the Interior detailing their activities and finances. This allowed the Government to check associations’ accounts, question some of their choices and even fabricate false evidence to discredit them. Such contrived offences, aimed at silencing civil society, were classified as defamation or disruption of public order, and those two offences were liable to severe punishment in Cambodia. A striking example was the length of the pre-trial detention of the leaders of the Cambodian Human Rights and Development Association (ADHOC), who had been held in such detention with forced labour for 427 days. Taking into account the incalculable number of possibilities of falling foul of the LANGO, the speaker called upon the Cambodian Government to fully commit to completely eradicating all recourse to forced labour, both as a form of intimidation or preventive measure to silence free speech and as a punishment for any sort of crime.

The Worker member of Australia recalled that her delegation had repeatedly registered its deep concern over the situation of labour rights in Cambodia, where trade union members faced ongoing discrimination, harassment, threats, pre-trial detention, arrest and imprisonment for seeking to exercise their fundamental rights despite the ratification of the Convention in 1999. The Government’s persistent non-compliance with international labour standards, particularly concerning freedom of peaceful assembly, freedom of association and freedom from arbitrary arrest, required the Committee’s ongoing scrutiny. The right to peaceful assembly, premised on a notification procedure of the Law on Peaceful Demonstration, had been turned into a system of permission. Arbitrary interpretations and enforcement of the law increased uncertainty and the risk of sanctions for those seeking to exercise that freedom. Concrete examples included, in 2016 and 2017, Phnom Penh City Hall’s use of armed police to bar 2,000–3,000 members of a consortium of independent unions from peacefully marching to the National Assembly for a May Day celebration; restricting NGOs such as the Cambodian Human Rights Action Committee from rallying to celebrate the Human Rights Day (10 December 2016), threatening “measures” if protestors were to disobey; and rejecting the request of 200 Khmer Krom to deliver a petition to the National Assembly (22 June 2017). Similarly, the authorities of Banteay Meanchey province had warned villagers against joining the CNRP and NGO celebrations on Human Rights Day; Battambang’s Bovil district’s provincial administration had rejected permission for the Boeung Bram community to march on Human Rights Day; Kampot authorities had denied three requests for celebrations; and Takeo authorities had forbidden the Khmer Krom Federation from celebrating International Human Rights Day in several villages and communes. More explicit threats by government officers had clearly violated Article 1 of the Convention. In a speech, the Prime Minister Hun Sen had threatened to “eliminate 100 or 200 people” if they supported the “colour revolution” to ensure Cambodia’s stability. The Prime Minister had repeated his readiness to use weapons and jail to curb demonstrations or challenge to 2018 election results. Likewise, the Minister of Social Affairs, Vong Soth, had warned of using bamboo rods against anyone protesting against the 2018 election. Prime Minister Hun Sen had ordered garment industry union leaders to ensure that factory workers did not organize political protests or associate with the remnants of the since-dissolved opposition party. The speaker urged the Committee to issue its strongest statement against the Government’s persistent breaches of the Convention and to maintain its supervision over the matter.

The Government representative thanked the delegates for their constructive interventions and comments. Clarification as to the grounds on which Cambodia was double footnoted was needed. In the Government’s opinion, this was linked to the upcoming July 2018 elections. Some delegates disguised the session as a political platform to tarnish the Government’s reputation, efforts and achievements. To express their political discontent, they should have used a different forum. In Geneva, a number of UN institutions and mechanisms dealt with human rights, the rule of law and democracy issues. The speaker recalled that the session of the Human Rights Council could be used by those wanting to improve the situation of human rights in the country. The International Labour Conference was the forum to discuss labour laws and relevant Conventions. It was not proper to use this forum to make political propaganda in order to give preferences to other political parties or individuals. Regarding the situation of freedom of association, the Government and the relevant parties, including the ILO, had agreed on the way forward to improve it. In reply to the statement by the EU representative, the speaker pointed out that while the EBA scheme had considerably helped the people and economy of Cambodia, the country’s sovereign interests should be respected. He urged the international community to respect Cambodia’s sovereignty, its peace, stability and economic development.

The Worker members stated that there was no effective guarantee of basic civil liberties in Cambodia, and those who exercised the right to freedom of expression and assembly became targets for criminal prosecution, imprisonment and compulsory labour. Trade unionists, human rights’ defenders, the political opposition and virtually anyone who adopted views opposed to those of the Government had come under enormous pressure involving detentions and prosecutions. Legislative provisions on public defamation had been applied in a selective manner to punish critical opinions. The Worker members expressed very deep concern over the lack of impartiality and independence in the judiciary, as well as the excessive pre-trial detention periods aimed at punishing those who seemingly opposed the current Government. This was particularly worrying in the context of the upcoming elections, during which free debate and exchange of views became even more important. The Government had therefore an obligation to take legislative measures to ensure that penalties involving compulsory labour were not imposed in order to silence and censor the peaceful expression of political opinions. The right to association and assembly provided the means through which citizens could seek to secure the dissemination and acceptance of their views and must therefore also be protected. Moreover, Article 1(d) of Convention No. 105 prohibited the imposition of compulsory labour for organizing or peacefully participating in strikes. The Government must ensure that freedom of association could be exercised in a climate free of intimidation and violence. All individuals who had been imprisoned for having exercised their right to freedom of expression and assembly must be released immediately and unconditionally. Institutional reforms were also necessary in order to guarantee the independence and impartiality of the judiciary. Freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, freedom of association and freedom from arbitrary arrest should be guaranteed as safeguards against the imposition of compulsory labour for exercising these rights. This required a serious commitment to undertake extensive reforms on a number of laws, which were clearly not in conformity with Convention No. 105, including the Law on Political Parties, the Penal Code, the Law on Trade Unions, the LANGO, the Law on Peaceful Demonstration and the Draft Minimum Wage Law. Freedom of expression and assembly, the right to strike and freedom from forced and compulsory labour were extremely important issues for working people but also for the values of the ILO as a whole. Therefore, the Government needed to work with the ILO in order to give full effect to Convention No. 105. A double-footnoted case meant that the Committee of Experts had serious concerns. The Worker members referred in this respect to section 68 of the Law on Prisons under which convicted prisoners who had been assessed as physically capable should be assigned to work as part of the prison’s daily routine and disagreed with the request to strike comments concerning the Law on Trade Unions and the draft Minimum Wage Law from the Record of Proceedings.

The Employer members reiterated that while it was undeniable that there were serious issues of concern regarding the situation of human rights in Cambodia, as noted by various UN bodies, including the UN Special Rapporteur, the Committee had to limit itself to dealing with Convention No. 105. The fact that this was a double-footnoted case meant that this was a serious case. However, no evidence demonstrating the existence of forced labour in the country had been provided. While there was a potential risk that forced labour could be imposed, there was no evidence that it had occurred. In these circumstances, and considering serious concerns regarding the application of various legislative provisions establishing sanctions in practice, the Government should be asked to give assurances that it would not be imposing forced labour.

Conclusions

The Committee took note of the information provided by the Government representative and the discussion that followed.

Taking into account the Government’s submissions and the discussion of the case that followed, the Committee urged the Government to:

- take measures in law and practice to ensure that no penalties involving forced labour or compulsory labour may be imposed in compliance with Article 1(a) of Convention No. 105, including the amendment of existing legislation that permits forced labour; and

- the Committee calls on the Government to avail itself of ILO technical assistance to address this recommendation. The Committee also asked the Government to report in detail on the measures taken to implement this recommendation to the next meeting of the Committee of Experts in November 2018.

The Government representative reiterated that forced labour had no place in Cambodia and that his Government was willing to provide factual and legal elements to shed light on this misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the Convention and of Cambodia’s relevant law and regulations that had given rise to the wrongful allegation that such practices existed. Despite his respect for the work of the Committee of Experts, any review that went beyond the Convention’s scope was not helpful to its application. Mutual understanding and close collaboration between social and development partners were effective tools for resolving misunderstandings and tensions. The existing social dialogue and tripartite mechanisms were especially critical to maintaining Cambodia’s hard-earned peace, stability and development. He welcomed the assistance of the ILO in promoting labour rights and decent work in accordance with international labour standards.

CMNT_TITLE

Previous comment

The Committee notes the observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE), received on 1 September 2023. It also notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), received on 27 September 2023. The Committee requests the Government to provide its reply to these observations.

Follow-up to the conclusions of the Committee on the Application of Standards (International Labour Conference, 111th Session, June 2023)

The Committee notes the detailed discussion that was held by the Committee on the Application of Standards (Conference Committee) at the 111th Session of the International Labour Conference (June 2023), regarding the application of the Convention by Cambodia.

The Committee notes that the Conference Committee deeply deplored the continued use of the provisions of the national legislation, including the Penal Code, to prosecute and convict persons who express their political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, or to punish those who participate in strikes, leading to the imposition of penalties of imprisonment involving compulsory prison labour. The Conference Committee also noted with deep concern the arrest and imprisonment of trade unionists and others for exercising their civil liberties and expressing different political views from that of the Government. The Conference Committee urged the Government to take measures to immediately and unconditionally release, quash convictions and drop all charges brought against individuals for having expressed political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, and against individuals who were punished for having participated in strikes.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving the obligation to work as a punishment for the expression of political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee recalls that penalties of imprisonment, which involve an obligation to work pursuant to section 68 of the Act on Prisons of 2011, might be imposed under various provisions of national legislation in circumstances falling within Article 1(a) of the Convention, including:

• section 42 of the Act on Political Parties, as amended in 2017, according to which various offences related to the administration or management of a political party which has been dissolved, or whose activities have been suspended by a court, or whose registration has been refused, are punishable with sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year;
• sections 494 and 495 on incitement to disturb public security by speech, writing, picture or any audio-visual communication in public or to the public, section 522 on publication of commentaries intended to unlawfully coerce judicial authorities, and section 523 on discrediting judicial decisions of the Penal Code;
• sections 445 and 437 bis of the Penal Code, introduced in 2018, relating to insult and criticism of the King.

The Committee notes that, in line with the Committee’s previous requests, the Conference Committee urged the Government to take effective and time-bound measures to: (i) ensure that the right to hold or express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system without the threat of penalties involving compulsory labour is fully respected; and to (ii) repeal or amend relevant provisions of the Penal Code and the Act on Political Parties providing for and leading to penalties of compulsory labour, in consultation with the social partners, in order to bring them into conformity with the Convention.

The Committee notes that the Government once again indicates, in its report, that Cambodian citizens are granted fundamental freedoms, including the right to express their opinions peacefully and to engage in political activities, which are enshrined in the Constitution. It adds that there are no punitive measures for individuals who peacefully express their political views, including opposition members, human rights defenders or journalists, provided that their activities remain within the legal framework and do not infringe the rights of others. The Government indicates that the legal actions taken against activists were not predicated on their exercise of human rights and social rights or their status as activists, but for having contravened specific laws, including those related to denouncement, dissemination of fake news, incitement with a view to causing civil unrest to social security, and treason, among others. All individuals subjected to legal actions are assured of due process. It adds that the legislative provisions are fundamentally designed to uphold the order, security, safety and interests and rights of all citizens. The Government further states that the Labour Law proscribes forced or compulsory labour and that prison labour is primarily a rehabilitative process aimed at facilitating the reintegration of prisoners into society, and is not assigned based on political opposition, human rights advocacy or journalistic activity.

The Committee notes that in its observations, the ITUC deplores the current and long-standing climate of repression in Cambodia, which is not conducive to the exercise of public freedoms, including freedom of association and freedom of collective action, particularly in view of the arrests and prosecutions of opposition party members, representatives of non-governmental organizations, trade unionists and human rights defenders. It states that the above-mentioned legal provisions are used to imprison and convict political dissidents, journalists, bloggers and trade unionists, who may be subject to an obligation to work. The ITUC stresses that a thorough review of these legal provisions and of the practices of the country in the field of the enforcement of criminal law is essential.

The Committee also notes that, in its observations, the IOE reiterates the statements of the Employer members during the Conference Committee discussion and expresses the hope that progress would be made in the application of the Convention in line with the Conference Committee’s conclusions and in close consultation with the most representative employer organization in Cambodia.

The Committee further notes that, in its report of 20 July 2023, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia indicates that he has continually received reports of attacks, unjustified arrests and prosecutions of human rights defenders, journalists and media personnel, political dissidents and others seen as being opponents of the authorities. He states that at the beginning of 2023, dozens of human rights defenders and environmentalists were estimated to be in detention, and that there was a rise in those numbers as compared with the previous year. The Special Rapporteur also refers to four mass trials between March 2021 and December 2022, mainly against members of the former Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP), under charges including incitement (sections 494 and 495 of the Penal Code), plotting (section 453), and conspiracy with a foreign power (section 443), resulting in a number of penalties of imprisonment (A/HRC/54/75, 20 July 2023).

The Committee therefore once again deeply deplores the continued use of various provisions of the national legislation to prosecute and convict opposition members, human rights defenders and journalists as a result of their work, leading to the imposition of sentences of imprisonment that entail compulsory prison labour. The Committee strongly urges the Government to take immediate and effective measures, both in law and practice, to put an end to any violation of the Convention, by ensuring that no one who expresses political opinions or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, including opposition members, human rights defenders and journalists can be sentenced to imprisonment, under the terms of which compulsory labour is imposed. The Committee once again urges the Government to amend section 42 of the Act on Political Parties and sections 437 bis, 445, 494, 495, 522 and 523 of the Penal Code by clearly restricting the scope of these provisions to situations connected with the use of violence or incitement to violence, or by repealing sanctions involving compulsory labour (compulsory prison labour). Lastly, the Committee urges the Government to ensure the immediate release of any person convicted to a prison sentence entailing compulsory prison labour, for peacefully expressing political views or opposing the established political, social or economic system.

Concerning the Cybercrime Bill, the Committee notes the Government’s statement in the written information provided to the Conference Committee that a dedicated working group has convened a review meeting and that a collaborative process has facilitated the advancement of this initiative. The Cybercrime Bill is under deliberation with all relevant stakeholders, with a concerted effort being made to integrate and harmonize input from all parties to ensure the law effectiveness, efficiency, pertinence, and coherence. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the Cybercrime Bill will comply with the Convention, without leaving any room for interpretation in its application that could lead to the imposition of a penalty involving compulsory work on persons who express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system.

Article 1(d). Punishment for participation in strikes. The Committee previously noted: (i) the sentencing to imprisonment for misdemeanour and malicious defamation under sections 311 and 312 of the Penal Code of two members of the Cambodian Labour Confederation (CLC), after taking part in a protest following the dismissal of union members and after filing a complaint against two workers for violence; (ii) the arrest and prosecution of four leaders of the Workers Friendship Union Federation for having organized an illegal strike, blocking traffic and disturbing public order; and (iii) the arrest and detention of at least 29 casino union leaders and activists during a strike, nine of whom had been charged with incitement to commit a felony, under sections 494 and 495 of the Penal Code.

The Committee notes that the Government indicates that peaceful assembly, when conducted in cooperation with the authorities and in compliance with security, safety and public health measures, constitutes the exercise of rights guaranteed by the Constitution. However, unannounced assemblies or other actions that constitute a violation of the law compel the authorities to intervene. The Government states that arrests have been necessary as a result of breaches of security, safety and public health measures, as well as instances of incitement to violence and social unrest that jeopardize public order, security, and the rights of freedom of others.

The Committee further notes the Government’s statement, in its written information provided to the Conference Committee, that the two members of the CLC sentenced to imprisonment referred to above are currently in employment. During the discussion of the case by the Conference Committee, the Government added that their cases were currently under appeal, and the Worker members of Cambodia specified that they had been given suspended sentences of imprisonment of six months at first instance.

As to the arrest of the Naga World casino’s union leaders, the Government states, in its written information provided to the Conference Committee, that the strike led by the union leaders in question breached the legal prerequisites for the exercise of the right to strike. It points out that despite the ruling of December 2021 indicating that the collective labour dispute at Naga World had to be submitted to the Arbitration Council’s procedure and mechanism, and that any new demands which had not been submitted to the Arbitration Council’s procedure could not constitute a valid cause for a strike, the dismissed workers initiated their strike outside Naga World. They were held accountable for their actions and charged under sections 494 and 495 of the Penal Code, as their participation in the strike, deemed illegal, had created substantial disturbances to public order and safety. The Government adds that additional arrests of these strikers had taken place following their violation of COVID-19 preventative measures during the strike. In total, the transgressions led to the arrest of 11 strikers. In March 2022, the court ordered the bail release of these former workers. In this regard, the Committee notes that during the Conference Committee discussion, a number of delegates reported that in May 2023, nine members of the Labour Rights Supported Union (LRSU) were convicted for incitement to commit a felony under sections 494 and 495 of the Penal Code after engaging in peaceful strikes at the casino, and sentenced for up to two years of imprisonment.

The Committee notes that in its observations, the ITUC also refers to the prison sentences handed down to the leaders of the LRSU on the basis of provisions of the Penal Code, which are contrary to the Convention. The ITUC adds that it appears that trade unionists have suffered criminal convictions as a result of their participation in peaceful collective actions.

The Committee has continually emphasized that no penal sanctions should be imposed against a worker for having carried out a peaceful strike and thus for merely exercising an essential right, and therefore that measures of imprisonment or fines should not be imposed on any account. Such sanctions could be envisaged only where, during a strike, violence against persons or property, or other serious infringements of penal law have been committed, and can be imposed exclusively pursuant to legislation punishing such acts, such as the Penal Code (see 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 158) The Committee therefore urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that no provision of the legislation is used to sentence a person who organizes or peacefully participates in a strike to a term of imprisonment, under which compulsory labour is imposed. It requests the Government to provide a copy of the court decisions referred to above. Lastly, the Committee urges the Government to ensure the immediate release of any person convicted to a prison sentence entailing compulsory prison labour for exercising peacefully their right to strike.

CMNT_TITLE

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving the obligation to work as a punishment for the expression of political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. Noting that penalties of imprisonment involve an obligation to work pursuant to section 68 of the Act on Prisons of 2011, the Committee previously referred to a number of provisions of the national legislation providing for penalties of imprisonment for certain activities, which fall within the scope of Article 1(a) of the Convention and thus have a bearing on the application of the Convention. The Committee expressed its deep concern over the detentions of, and prosecutions against members of the opposition party, NGO representatives, trade union members and human rights defenders, and deplored the imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour) of members of the Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP), which was dissolved in November 2017.

The Committee requested the Government to review the following provisions of the national legislation and urged the Government to ensure that no penalties involving compulsory labour may be imposed pursuant to these provisions on persons who express political views or views opposed to the established political, economic or social system:

• (i)section 42 of the Act on Political Parties, as amended in 2017, according to which various offences related to the administration or management of a political party which has been dissolved, or whose activities have been suspended by a court, or whose registration has been refused, are punishable with sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year;
• (ii)sections 494 and 495 on incitement to disturb public security by speech, writing, picture or any audio-visual communication in public or to the public, section 522 on publication of commentaries intended to unlawfully coerce judicial authorities, and section 523 on discrediting judicial decisions of the Penal Code of 2009;
• (iii)sections 305-309 on public defamation and insult; and
• (iv)provisions of the Penal Code relating to insult and criticism of the King (section 445 and section 437 bis introduced in 2018).

The Government indicates in its report that the freedom of citizens to express themselves peacefully and to engage in politics is guaranteed by national legislation. It states that any citizen can freely support any political party without being discriminated against, except in the case of the commission of criminal offences. It points out that the Government has no power to dissolve a political party; only the Supreme Court has the authority to do so. In addition, it states that section 42 of the Act on Political Parties as amended provides a precise definition regarding the penalty for any person who “continues to administer or lead a political party that the Supreme Court has finally dissolved”. It adds that criticizing the letters and judgements of the Court with the aim of causing disorder or jeopardising the institutions of the Cambodian Government and disrespecting the Court’s judgement is deemed a criminal offence according to the Penal Code. Regarding the Cybercrime Act, the Government indicates that the adoption of the draft Act has been postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic and that discussions on the draft Act are still ongoing.

The Committee notes that, in its concluding observations of 2022, the United Nations Human Rights Committee expressed concern over: (i) the persistent violation of the freedom of expression, including through reports of the closure of media outlets, the blockage of websites critical of the Government, and the use of criminal legal actions against journalists and human rights defenders; (ii) the arrest and detention of protesters; (iii) the dissolution of the CNRP in 2017 and of three other opposition parties in 2021; (iv) threats, harassment, arbitrary arrests and mass trials targeting members of the opposition; and (v) the persistent lack of an independent and impartial judiciary (CCPR/C/KHM/CO/3, paragraphs 20, 32, 34, 36 and 38). In this regard, the Committee also notes the information from a news release of 29 June 2022 from a number of United Nations experts according to which at least 43 defendants, who were linked to the CNRP, were convicted in June 2022 at a mass trial on charges of plotting and incitement, and sentenced to penalties of up to eight years’ imprisonment. The United Nations experts highlighted the existence of judicial flaws in these political trials and the lack of solid evidence supporting the charges.

The Committee further notes the concern of the United Nations human rights experts, in a statement of 24 August 2021, regarding sections 494 and 495 of the Penal Code, which are being used systematically to target and convict human rights defenders. In addition, the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia underlined, in a press release of 6 October 2021, intolerance towards online criticism of the COVID-19 response, which had led to several arrests and prosecutions, 25 human rights defenders imprisoned, nine opposition political figures sentenced to up to 25 years, and 50 reported instances of harassment of journalists in 2021.

The Committee deeply deplores the continued use of the provisions of the national legislation to arrest, prosecute and convict human rights defenders, opposition members and journalists who express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, leading to the imposition of penalties of imprisonment which involve compulsory prison labour. The Committee recalls that although some convictions have been made in accordance with the law of the State, they may fall within the scope of the Convention and thus be contrary to the Convention in so far as they allow persons holding or expressing political or ideological views to be compelled to work. The Committee emphasizes that limitations may be imposed by law on the rights and freedoms of expression which must be accepted as normal safeguards against their abuse (for example the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others or meeting the just requirements of public order). However, these limitations must meet strict standards of scrutiny regarding their justification and scope and the offences established in the legislation for that purpose should not be defined in such wide or general terms or applied by the judiciary in a way that they will lead to the imposition of penalties involving compulsory labour as a punishment for the expression of political or ideological views (see 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraphs 302–304).

The Committee strongly urges the Government to take immediate and effective measures to ensure that persons who express political views or views opposed to the established system, including that of opposition members, human rights defenders and journalists, are not punished with penal sanctions involving compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour. It urges the Government to review the wording of section 42 of the Act on Political Parties as well as sections 445, 437 bis, 494, 495, 522 and 523 of the Penal Code, by clearly restricting the scope of these provisions to situations connected with the use of violence or incitement to violence, or by repealing sanctions involving compulsory labour, so as to ensure that their application in practice does not lead to the violation of the Convention. The Committee also requests the Government to provide training to law enforcement bodies in this regard. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide a copy of the amendments to the Penal Code in 2018 which criminalize criticism of the King, as well as information on the practical application of the above-mentioned provisions of the Penal Code and the Act on Political Parties, including the facts that gave rise to the convictions and the nature of the sanctions imposed. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the Cybercrime Bill will be drafted and applied taking into account the principles evoked above and the obligations of the Government under the Convention.

Article 1(d) of the Convention. Punishment for participation in strikes. The Committee previously noted from the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) that Van Narong and Pel Voeun, two members of the Cambodian Labour Confederation (CLC), were sentenced to imprisonment for misdemeanour and malicious defamation under sections 311 and 312 of the Penal Code after taking part in a protest following the dismissal of union members and after filing a complaint against two workers for violence. It also noted the arrest and prosecution of four leaders of the Workers Friendship Union Federation for having organized an illegal strike, blocking traffic and disturbing public order. The Committee requested the Government to indicate the legislative provisions and factual arguments on the basis of which the above-mentioned individuals were arrested and prosecuted.

The Government indicates that Van Narong and Pel Voeun were convicted for misdemeanour and malicious defamation, and that their allegations of violence were fictitious. Regarding the arrest and prosecution of the four leaders of the Workers Friendship Union Federation, the Government indicates that it will update the Committee on any developments in this case. The Government also points out that individuals are prosecuted for the offences they have committed and that trade unionists do not enjoy any privilege of impunity.

The Committee notes that in a press release of 5 January 2022, a number of United Nations human rights experts referred to the arrest and detention of at least 29 casino union leaders and activists during a strike, out of which nine have so far been charged with incitement to commit a felony, under sections 494 and 495 of the Penal Code, and remain in custody while the others have been released. The Committee further notes the concerns expressed by United Nations experts in a press release of 16 February 2022 regarding the measures taken under COVID-19 used to impose restrictions on lawful and peaceful strikers. The United Nations experts deemed these restrictions to be unjustified, unnecessary and disproportionate.

The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the application of legislative provisions will not lead in practice to the imposition of sanctions involving compulsory labour (such as compulsory prison labour) on workers for the mere fact of organizing or peacefully participating in strikes, in conformity with Article 1(d) of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress made in this regard. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of the court decision regarding the four leaders of the above-mentioned Workers Friendship Union Federation.

In light of the situation described above, the Committee is bound to observe that there has been no progress with regard to protecting freedom of expression in Cambodia and that opposition political activists, journalists, human rights defenders and social media activists who express dissent or criticism of the authorities are convicted and imprisoned under various provisions of the national legislation, including the Penal Code. The Committee deeply deplores the continued use of the provisions of the national legislation, including the Penal Code, to prosecute and convict persons who express their political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, leading to penalties of imprisonment involving compulsory prison labour. The Committee considers that this case meets the criteria set out in paragraph 114 of its General Report to be asked to come before the Conference.

[The Government is asked to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 111th Session and to reply in full to the present comments in 2023.]

CMNT_TITLE

The Committee notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), received on 1 September 2018.

Article 1(d) of the Convention. Punishment for participation in strikes. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, pursuant to section 68 of the Law on Prisons of 2011, sanctions of imprisonment involves an obligation to work. The Committee also noted the Government’s information that no workers were arrested for the mere fact of organizing or peacefully participating in a strike, unless they committed criminal offences pursuant to the Penal Code. However, the Committee noted the observations received from the ITUC in 2017 in the context of the application of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), according to which, 25 leaders of the Cambodian Labour Confederation (CLC) or its affiliates had been jailed for their union activities since 2014. Among others, two members of the Free Trade Union, who led a one-month strike, were arrested without an arrest warrant and charged with incitement and intentional violence by a provincial court in 2016. The strike procedure had been followed and the protest was peaceful. The Committee therefore requested the Government to indicate the legislative provisions and factual arguments on the basis of which individuals had been arrested and prosecuted, for example by providing a copy of police reports or court decisions.

The Committee notes the Government’s response in its report that the allegation that the arrest of two members of the Free Trade Union without an arrest warrant in February 2016 does not reflect the truth. The Government states that the two persons concerned were arrested under warrant No. 92DBKK/016 of 2 February 2016 issued by the Kompong Speu Provincial Court of First Instance, and put under judicial control for incitement to commit offences and intentional violence with aggravating circumstances, in accordance with sections 494, 495 and 218 of the Penal Code. The Committee notes the copy of arrest warrants and police reports attached to the Government’s report.

However, the Committee notes from the observations of the ITUC and the ITUC Global Rights Index 2018 that, on 20 October 2017, Van Narong and Pel Voeun, two members of the CLC, were sentenced to imprisonment of six months for misdemeanour and malicious defamation under sections 311 and 312 of the Penal Code. They took part in a protest in February 2017 against Capitol Bus to demand the reinstatement of drivers who had been dismissed for joining the union. The ITUC further states that they had also filed a complaint against two workers from a yellow union named Cambodia for Confederation Development Association (CCDA) for beating up protesters. The court dismissed the case claiming that there was no evidence, while the two members of the CCDA lodged a counter-complaint for defamation against Van Narong and Pel Voeun, which was supported by the court. The ITUC also indicates in its observations that, on 14 February 2018, four leaders of the Workers Friendship Union Federation were arrested and prosecuted for having organized an illegal strike, blocking traffic and disturbing the public order.

In this regard, the Committee once again recalls that pursuant to Article 1(d) of the Convention, no sanctions involving compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, should be imposed on workers for the mere fact of organizing or peacefully participating in strikes. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the legislative provisions and factual arguments on the basis of which the abovementioned individuals have been arrested and prosecuted, for example by providing a copy of police reports or court decisions.

CMNT_TITLE

Follow-up to the conclusions of the Committee on the Application of Standards (International Labour Conference, 107th Session, May–June 2018)

The Committee notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), received on 1 September 2018, and the detailed discussion which took place in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in May–June 2018, concerning the application by Cambodia of the Convention.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving the obligation to work as a punishment for the expression of political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, pursuant to section 68 of the Law on Prisons of 2011, sanctions of imprisonment involve an obligation to work. The Committee also noted that, according to section 42 of the Law on Political Parties of 2017, various offences related to the administration or management of a political party which has been dissolved, or whose activities have been suspended by a court, or whose registration has been refused, are punishable with sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year, involving compulsory labour. The Government stated that no political party had been dissolved by a court decision.

The Committee further noted that, although the offences of public defamation and insult (sections 305–309) are punishable with fines only under the Penal Code of 2009, the application of those provisions in practice led to the imposition of penalties of imprisonment. Moreover, several sections under the Penal Code of 2009 providing for a penalty of imprisonment may still be used in situations covered by Article 1(a) of the Convention, including: (i) sections 494 and 495 on incitement to disturb public security by speech, writing, picture or any audiovisual communication in public or to the public; (ii) section 522 on publication of commentaries intended to unlawfully coerce judicial authorities and; (iii) section 523 on discrediting judicial decisions. Additionally, the legislation on cybercrime was being drafted.

Moreover, the Committee expressed its deep concern over the detentions of, and prosecutions against members of opposition parties, NGO representatives, trade union members and human rights defenders since 2014, including the arrest of and the prosecution against several senior member of the Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP) in 2016 and 2017.

The Committee notes from the observations of the ITUC that the practice of criminalizing the expression of different political and ideological speech and opinion is normalized by the Government, coupled with legislation that enables it to do so. Under the Penal Code, the application of some provisions in practice may fall within the scope of the Convention. For example, section 311 criminalizes the public denunciation of facts known to be false that is addressed to competent authorities, such as a judge, judicial police officer or an employer, or a person with power to refer the denunciation to the competent authority. Such offence is punishable by imprisonment of between one month to one year and fines of 100,000–2,000,000 Cambodian riels (KHR) (about US$24–US$487) pursuant to section 312. Moreover, section 502 criminalizes the use of words, gestures, writings, sketches or objects which undermine the dignity of persons. Particularly, if the insult is against a public official or a holder of public elected office, the offence is punishable by imprisonment of one to six days and fines of KHR1,000–100,000 (about US$0.24–US$24). In addition, the amendment to the Constitution, which was passed on 15 February 2018, further undermines the fundamental freedoms in the country, along with other changes to domestic law, including the Penal Code. The new crime of insulting the King, pursuant to section 445 of the amended Penal Code, is punishable by up to six months in prison and fines of up to KHR10,000,000 (US$2,495) for speeches, gestures, writings, paintings or public meetings that affect the dignity of the monarch. The ITUC also indicates that two persons have been arrested under section 445. On 14 May 2018, Khean Navy, the principal of a Kampong Thom primary school, was arrested for insulting the King after he had blamed the monarch for the dissolution of the CNRP in 2017 and the loss of Khmer land. On 21 May 2018, another person in Siem Reap was charged for sharing a post on Facebook that allegedly insulted the King.

The Committee notes that, in its conclusions adopted in June 2018, the Conference Committee urged the Government to take measures in law and practice to ensure that no penalties involving forced or compulsory labour may be imposed in compliance with the Convention, including the amendment of existing legislation that permits compulsory labour. It also called on the Government to avail itself of ILO technical assistance to address this recommendation.

The Committee notes the Government’s information in its report that the Law on Prisons of 2011 was adopted in accordance with a wide range of international standards, and that prisoners are required to perform labour for the purposes of education, reformation, rehabilitation and reintegration into society. The Government states that the Convention cannot be interpreted alone without any reference to the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), and that its application shall not be carried out with any special agenda in favour of any particular group. The Government also indicates that, under Cambodian laws, there is no penalty imposed for the peaceful expression of political views, and there are no prisoners convicted for their peaceful expression of political views. Consequently, no punishment involving compulsory labour is imposed in situations covered by Article 1 of the Convention. The Government further indicates that, regarding incitement, sections 494 and 495 of the Penal Code only provide for penalties of imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) for acts directly inciting the commission of a felony or the commission of any act gravely disturbing public security. Section 522 provides for penalties of imprisonment for the publication, prior to the final decision of the court, of any commentaries aimed at putting pressure on the court where a law suit is filed, in order to influence the decision of the court. The purpose of this section is to ensure judicial independence. Similarly, section 523 aims at protecting the country and its institutions from danger caused by acts of criticisms as stipulated therein. Lastly, the Government states that a copy of the Law on Cybercrime will be provided to the Committee once adopted.

The Committee notes that, according to a news release of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) of the United Nations (UN) of 30 April 2018, the main opposition, the CNRP, was dissolved in November 2017. The leader of the dissolved CNRP, Kem Sokha, who was detained in September 2017, remains in prison on treason charges related to comments he made in 2013 about his grass-roots political strategy to challenge the current Government. Many other CNRP members and supporters have also been imprisoned, along with former leaders of other political parties, including Nhek Bun Chhay of the Khmer National United Party, and Soun Sereyrotha of the Khmer Power Party.

The Committee also notes that, on 11 May 2018, the spokesperson for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights expressed disappointment at the decision by Cambodia’s Court of Appeal on 10 May 2018 to uphold the “insurrection” conviction of 11 CNRP members and supporters, who were originally sentenced on 21 July 2015 to between seven and 20 years in prison in relation to violence during a demonstration at Phnom Penh’s Freedom Park on 15 July 2014. The spokesperson stated that no evidence was produced during the trial or appeal to link any of the 11 accused persons with violence, or the charges of “insurrection” defined in laws as “collective violence liable to endanger the institutions of the Kingdom or violate the integrity of the national territory”. None of the injured complainants or video recordings of the incident that were presented as evidence identified any of the accused persons as having undertaken, incited or guided any violent acts. Moreover, the Committee notes that, on 20 February 2018, the UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Cambodia, and the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, expressed their grave concern about changes to Cambodia’s Constitution, along with other changes to domestic law including a lèse-majesté provision in the Penal Code making it illegal to insult the monarchy.

In this regard, the Committee considers that, although the Convention was designed to supplement Convention No. 29, the exception in respect of prison labour laid down in Article 2(2) of Convention No. 29 “for the purposes of this Convention” does not automatically apply to Convention No. 105. Consequently, with regard to the exemption of prison labour, if a person has to perform compulsory prison labour because she or he has expressed particular political views, the situation is covered by Article 1(a) of the Convention. The Committee observes in this regard that, while convict labour exacted from common offenders convicted, for example, of robbery, kidnapping, bombing or numerous other offences, is intended to reform or rehabilitate them, the same need does not arise in the case of persons convicted for their opinions (see 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 300).

The Committee therefore deplores the imprisonment (involving compulsory prison labour) of leaders, members and supporters of the CNRP, which was dissolved in November 2017, for their political views. It must also express its deep concern at the adoption of amendments to the Penal Code which criminalize criticism of the King. The Committee once again recalls that restriction on fundamental rights and liberties, including freedom of expression, have a bearing on the application of the Convention if such restrictions are enforced by sanctions involving compulsory prison labour. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the fact that legal guarantees of the rights to freedom of thought and expression, freedom of peaceful assembly, freedom of association, as well as freedom from arbitrary arrest, constitute an important safeguard against the imposition of compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political or ideological views, or as a means of political coercion or education (see General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, 2012, paragraph 302). The Committee therefore once again urges the Government to take immediate measures to ensure that no penalties involving compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, may be imposed for the peaceful expression of political views opposed to the established system, both in law and in practice. In this regard, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that section 42 of the Law on Political Parties as amended in 2017, as well as sections 494, 495, 522 and 523 of the Penal Code of 2009 are amended, by clearly restricting the scope of these provisions to situations connected with the use of violence or incitement to violence, or by repealing sanctions involving compulsory labour. It also requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the application of the relevant provisions in the Penal Code does not lead in practice to punishment involving compulsory labour in situations covered by Article 1(a) of the Convention. The Committee further requests the Government to provide a copy of the amendments to the Penal Code in 2018 which criminalize criticism of the King, and to provide information on its application in practice, including any prosecutions, convictions and penalties imposed in this regard. Lastly, it requests the Government to provide information on any progress made regarding the adoption of the Law on Cybercrime, and to provide a copy once adopted. The Committee encourages the Government to avail itself of ILO technical assistance in order to bring its law and practice into full compliance with the Convention.

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

CMNT_TITLE

Article 1(d) of the Convention. Punishment for participation in strikes. The Committee previously noted the communication received from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in 2014 in the context of the application of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), according to which 23 workers were arrested in January 2014 for participating in strikes and demonstrations. Although all 23 workers were sentenced to between four and five years’ imprisonment, the sentences were suspended and the workers were freed due to international pressure. The Committee also noted that, in his report of 2014, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia expressed concern regarding the upsurge of judicial intimidation of union activists in 2014, which included arrests in Kandal, Kampong Speu and Takeo provinces.

The Committee notes the Government’s information in its report that no workers were arrested for the mere fact of organizing or peacefully participating in a strike, unless they committed criminal offences pursuant to the Penal Code. However, the Committee notes the observations received from the ITUC on 1 September 2017 in the context of the application of Convention No. 87, according to which, 25 leaders of the Cambodian Labour Confederation or its affiliates have been jailed for their union activities since 2014. Among others, two members of the Free Trade Union were arrested without an arrest warrant in February 2016 and charged with incitement and intentional violence by a provincial court a month later. They were leading workers in a one-month strike over the dismissals of three unionists for trying to form a union in Cerie garment factory in Samrong Tong district, although the strike procedure had been followed and the protest was peaceful. In this regard, the Committee once again recalls that pursuant to Article 1(d) of the Convention, no sanctions involving compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, should be imposed on workers for the mere fact of organizing or peacefully participating in strikes. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to indicate the legislative provisions and factual arguments on the basis of which individuals have been arrested and prosecuted, for example by providing a copy of police reports or court decisions.

[The Government is asked to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 107th Session and to reply in full to the present comments in 2018.]

CMNT_TITLE

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving the obligation to work as a punishment for the expression of political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee previously noted that, according to section 41 of the Law on Political Parties of 1997, various offences related to the administration or management of a political party which has been dissolved, or whose activities have been suspended by a court, or whose registration has been refused, are punishable with sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year, which involves compulsory labour pursuant to section 68 of the Law on Prisons of 2011. The Committee also noted that, pursuant to the Penal Code of 2009, the offences of public defamation and insult (sections 305–309) are punishable with fines only. The Committee further noted the adoption of the Law on Peaceful Demonstrations of 2009 and the arrest of seven opposition members of Parliament in July 2014 during protests against the ban on demonstrations imposed by the Government in January 2014 after the number of protests in the country escalated in late 2013.

The Committee notes the Government’s information in its report that no political party has been dissolved by a court decision under the Law on Political Parties of 2007. The Government also indicates that a demonstration may not be carried out in the event that it endangers or may adversely affect the public order, safety and security. Moreover, perpetrators of the criminal offence of riots or leading of riots were arrested in accordance with the Penal Code.

The Committee also notes that the Law on Political Parties of 2007 was amended in 2017, pursuant to which section 42 of the amended version retains the provisions of section 41 of the previous version. Moreover, several sections under the Penal Code of 2009 providing for a penalty of imprisonment may still be used in situations covered by Article 1(a) of the Convention, including sections 494 and 495 on incitement to disturb public security by speech, writing, picture or any audio-visual communication in public or to the public; section 522 on publication of commentaries intended to unlawfully coerce judicial authorities; and section 523 on discrediting judicial decisions. The Committee further notes the adoption of the Law on Associations and Non-Governmental Organizations in 2015 and the adoption of the Law on Trade Unions in 2016. Additionally, the legislation on cybercrime is currently being drafted.

The Committee notes that, according to the Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia of 5 September 2016, in the case of many laws, the degree of their compliance with international human rights laws lies in the interpretation and application of the law by law enforcement and judicial officials (A/HRC/33/62, paragraph 29). In her report of 27 July 2017, the Special Rapporteur expressed her concern at the raft of laws (on associations and NGOs, on the election of members of the National Assembly, on trade unions and on peaceful demonstrations) that can be used to restrict freedom of assembly and association and freedom of expression (A/HRC/36/61, paragraph 47).

The Committee also notes that, the report of the Special Rapporteur of 2017 indicates that several senior member of the Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP), the largest opposition party, have been the subject of convictions and sentences (paragraph 6). Senator Hong Sok Hour was sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment on 9 November 2016 for forgery and incitement in connection with a Facebook post. Senator Thak Lany, who is currently in exile, was convicted in absentia to 18 months’ imprisonment on charges of defamation and incitement in connection with a video clip on Facebook purportedly of a speech with comments on the death of a political activist, Kem Ley (paragraph 7). Moreover, the High Commissioner for Human Rights of the United Nations expressed his serious concern in a statement of 4 September 2017 at the arrest of Kem Sokha, the current president of CNRP. Kem Sokha is accused of treason and faces a prison term of between 15 and 30 years if convicted, based on a video of a speech he made in 2013, which has been publicly available since then.

The Committee further notes that, according to the report of the Special Rapporteur of 2017, many NGO representatives, trade union members and human rights defenders are still subjected to threats, harassment, arrest, pre-trial detention and prosecution (paragraph 45). Notably, in 2016, five members of the Cambodian Human Rights and Development Association (CHRDA) were arrested and kept in pre-trial detention for over a year. They were released under judicial supervision in June 2017, while the trial dates are still pending (paragraphs 21 and 22). Moreover, a number of protesters related to the “black Monday” campaign against the arrest of these staff of the CHRDA were arrested and prosecuted for defamation, public insult and various public order offences under the Penal Code. Among others, Tep Vanny was prosecuted following her participation in a black Monday event on 15 August 2016. She was then charged with “intentional violence with aggravating circumstances” relating to another protest in 2013, and sentenced to two and a half years’ imprisonment on 23 February 2017 (paragraph 45). Moreover, an independent political analyst, Kim Sok, has been in pre-trial detention since 17 February 2017 on defamation and incitement charges for publically expressing his opinion that the ruling party was responsible for the killing of Kem Ley (paragraph 48).

The Committee notes that although the offences of public defamation and insult are punishable with fines only under the Penal Code of 2009, those provisions have been applied to the various persons mentioned above to punish them with penalties of imprisonment. The Committee is bound to express its deep concern over the detentions of, and prosecutions against members of the opposition party, NGO representatives, trade union members and human rights defenders and recalls that restriction on fundamental rights and liberties, including freedom of expression, may have a bearing on the application of the Convention if such restrictions are enforced by sanctions involving compulsory labour. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the fact that legal guarantees of the rights to freedom of thought and expression, freedom of peaceful assembly, freedom of association, as well as freedom from arbitrary arrest, constitute an important safeguard against the imposition of compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political or ideological views, or as a means of political coercion or education (see General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, 2012, paragraph 302). The Committee therefore urges the Government to take immediate measures to ensure that no penalties involving compulsory labour may be imposed for the peaceful expression of political views or views opposed to the established system, both in law and in practice. In this regard, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that section 42 of the Law on Political Parties as amended in 2017, as well as sections 494, 495, 522 and 523 of the Penal Code of 2009 are amended, by clearly restricting the scope of these provisions to situations connected with the use of violence or incitement to violence, or by repealing sanctions involving compulsory labour. It also requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the application of the Penal Code, the Law on Trade Unions, the Law on Associations and Non governmental Organizations and the Law on Peaceful Demonstration in practice does not lead to punishment involving compulsory labour in situations covered by Article 1(a) of the Convention. Lastly, the Committee requests the Government to provide a copy of the legislation on cybercrimes, once adopted.

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

[The Government is asked to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 107th Session and to reply in full to the present comments in 2018.]

CMNT_TITLE

As regards its previous request on the regulations governing labour relations in maritime transport, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that, although the current labour law does not cover labour relations in maritime transport, it is not possible for the Government to adopt specific legislation on this matter for the time being. The Committee notes further the information provided by the Government on the application in practice of section 12 of the Press Law of 1995. Finally, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the disciplinary measures and penal sanctions applicable to public servants.

Article 1(d) of the Convention. Punishment for participation in strikes. The Committee notes the communication received from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) on 31 August 2014 in the context of the application of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), according to which 23 workers were arrested in January 2014 for participating in strikes and demonstrations. According to the ITUC, although all 23 workers were sentenced to between four–five years imprisonment, sentences were suspended and the workers freed due to international pressure. Corroborating the communication of the ITUC, the Committee notes the report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia of August 2014 in which he expressed concern regarding the upsurge of judicial intimidation of union activists in April and May 2014, which included arrests in Kandal, Kampong Speu and Takeo provinces (A/HRC/27/70, paragraph 24). In this regard, the Committee recalls that pursuant to Article 1(d) of the Convention no sanctions involving compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, should be imposed on workers for the mere fact of organizing or peacefully participating in strikes. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the legislative provisions and factual arguments on the basis of which individuals have been arrested.

CMNT_TITLE

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving the obligation to work as a punishment for the expression of political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee previously noted that section 61 of the Provisions relating to the Judiciary and Criminal Law and Procedure applicable in Cambodia during the transitional period, 1992, provides for sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year (which involves compulsory prison labour pursuant to section 68 of the Law on Prisons of 2011) for the incitement of national, racial or religious hatred by means of speech or meetings in a public place, or by writings, publications, paintings, films or any other means of audio visual communication (“incitement to discrimination”). It also observed that section 41 of the Law on political parties of 1997, makes punishable with sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year various offences related to the administration or management of a political party which has been dissolved, or whose activities have been suspended by a court, or whose registration has been refused.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 41 of the Law on political parties of 1997 has never been applied in practice and that section 61 of the 1992 Law was abrogated and replaced by the Penal Code of 2009. The Government refers in particular to the sections of the Penal Code concerning defamation, public demonstrations, insult, and insult of public officials. In this connection, the Committee observes that, although the crimes of public defamation and insult (sections 305–309) are punishable with fines only, numerous provisions of the Penal Code establish sanctions of imprisonment in situations covered by Article 1(a) of the Convention; such sanctions are therefore incompatible with the Convention, namely:

• – section 445, sanctioning the act of insulting the King;
• – sections 504 and 505, sanctioning the act of direct provocation aimed at committing a felony or discrimination on the basis of ethnic, national, racial or religious grounds, through public speeches or meetings, publications or any kind of audio-visual communication;
• – section 511, sanctioning the act of insulting, through words, gestures, writings, sketches or objects, a civil servant or a citizen entrusted with public mandate by an election whilst performing his/her function;
• – section 517, sanctioning the act of celebrating, in a religious premise open to the public, a Buddhist ceremony without having been authorized by a religious authority.

With reference to paragraphs 302 and 303 of its 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, the Committee once again draws the Government’s attention to the fact that sanctions involving compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, are incompatible with the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the peaceful expression of non-violent views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures in order to bring the above provisions of the Penal Code, as well as section 41 of the Law on political parties (1997) into conformity with the Convention, either by limiting their scope to acts of violence or incitement to violence, or by replacing sanctions of imprisonment with other kinds of sanctions (e.g. fines), in order to ensure that no sanctions involving compulsory labour, can be imposed as a punishment for holding or expressing political views. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the application of the above provisions in practice, supplying copies of court decisions defining or illustrating their scope.

The Committee notes the adoption of the Law on Peaceful Demonstrations of 21 October 2009, which replaces the Law on Demonstrations of 1991. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that, although freedom of expression and the right to peacefully demonstrate are guaranteed by the Constitution, such rights must not be used in violation of the freedom and dignity of others or in ways affecting the tradition of the nation, public order or national security.

The Committee refers, in this connection, to the report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia of August 2014, in which he expressed concern at the ban on demonstrations imposed by the Government in January 2014 after the number of protests in the country escalated in late 2013. The Special Rapporteur observed that, while measures may be taken to limit civil and political liberties in time of public emergency, no official proclamation of a public emergency threatening the life of the nation appeared to have been issued by the Government. The UN Rapporteur also stated that seven opposition members of Parliament were arrested in July 2014 while protesting for a lifting of the ban, which, at the time of drafting of his report, remained in force (A/HRC/27/70, paragraphs 17, 21 and 22). Referring to the explanations in point 1 of this observation, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the legislative provisions on the basis of which the ban on demonstrations was imposed, indicating, in particular, the legal basis and justification for the arrest of demonstrators.

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

CMNT_TITLE

Communication of texts. The Committee notes the copies of the New Penal Code, the Law on Demonstrations, and the Circular No. 005 (2000) and Notification No. 20 (2000) on the right to strike supplied by the Government with its report. It requests the Government once again to provide, with its next report, copies of the provisions governing prison labour and the law governing labour relations in maritime transport, to which reference is made in section 1(d) of the Labour Law, 1997, including any disciplinary provisions applicable to seafarers.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for the expression of views opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee previously noted that section 61 of the Provisions relating to the Judiciary and Criminal Law and Procedure applicable in Cambodia during the transitional period, 1992, provides for sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year (which involves compulsory prison labour) for the incitement of national, racial or religious hatred by means of speech or meetings in a public place, or by writings, publications, paintings, films or any other means of audiovisual communication (“incitement to discrimination”). It also noted the provisions of section 41 of the Law on political parties, of 28 October 1997, which make punishable with sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year (involving compulsory prison labour) various offences related to the administration or management of a political party which has been dissolved, or whose activities have been suspended by a court, or whose registration has been refused.

The Committee recalled that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It referred in this connection to paragraph 154 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour, where it observed that the Convention does not prohibit punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence, incite to violence or engage in preparatory acts aimed at violence; but sanctions involving compulsory labour fall within the scope of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the expression of views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system. Similar problems of the application of the Convention may arise from restrictions affecting the creation or functioning of associations, where administrative authorities enjoy wide discretionary powers to suspend associations or to prevent their creation, if such restrictions are enforceable with penalties involving compulsory labour.

The Committee requests the Government once again to provide, in its next report, information on the application of the abovementioned provisions in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their scope, so as to enable the Committee to ascertain whether they are applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

The Committee previously noted that section 12 of the Press Law of 18 July 1995, contains a prohibition to publish or reproduce information that affects national security or political stability, violation of this prohibition being punishable with fines, but also with sanctions under criminal law. Noting that the Government’s report contains no information on this issue and referring to the explanations in point 1 of this direct request, the Committee hopes the Government will not fail to provide, in its next report, information on the application in practice of section 12 of the Press Law (1995), clarifying the kind of criminal sanctions applicable in case of violation of this section. Please provide copies of any relevant texts, as well as copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating the scope of the above provision, indicating the criminal penalties imposed.

The Committee notes the Law on Demonstrations provided by the Government in its report. It notes, in particular, that section 1 of the above Law prohibits public meetings and demonstrations which can be detrimental to public tranquillity, order or security. Under section 4, authorities “can take measures to stop” any demonstration which takes place without local authorities authorization. The Committee requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the application in practice of the Law on Demonstrations, indicating, in particular, whether sanctions of imprisonment may be applied in case of violation of its provisions. Please provide copies of any relevant texts, as well as copies of any court decisions passed under the above Law, indicating the penalties imposed.

The Committee notes the adoption of the new Penal Code, in effect since December 2010. Pending a translation of the new text, the Committee notes the report of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia, presented at the 18th Session of the UN Human Rights Council on 2 August 2011 (document No. A/HRC/18/46), in which the Special Rapporteur expresses concern about provisions in many laws in Cambodia, including the new Penal Code, that go beyond international standards in curtailing people’s freedoms, as do the courts’ application and interpretation of such laws. The Committee also notes that, in the report, the Special Rapporteur refers to a worrying trend of restrictions on freedom of expression in the form of criminal defamation, disinformation and incitement suits that had resulted in prison terms for individuals, including journalists, NGO workers and parliamentarians, who had no intention of affecting national security. In this connection, the Special Rapporteur refers, in particular, to convictions for disinformation and defamation under section 305 of the new Penal Code, and for incitement under section 495 of the same Law, in which sentences of imprisonment (involving an obligation to work) have been imposed.

Corroborating the communications of the UN Special Rapporteur, the Committee notes the report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review, presented at the 13th Session of the UN Human Rights Council on 4 January 2010 (document No. A/HRC/13/4), in which the Working Group recommended that Cambodia review its newly adopted penal code with a view to ensuring its compliance with the permissible limitations to freedom of expression and define the scope of defamation and disinformation charges to ensure that these do not impinge on freedom of expression, giving clear guidance to judicial officials so that these provisions do not result in a large number of cases where the charges are disproportionate (paragraph 46). The Committee hopes that the Government will provide, in its next report, information on the measures taken or contemplated with a view to giving effect to the above recommendations, in particular as regards the revision of the provisions restricting freedom of expression, as well as information on any other measures taken or envisaged to ensure compliance with the Convention on this point.

Article 1(c). Sanctions applicable to public servants. The Committee previously noted that section 35 of the Law on the common statute of civil servants, of 26 October 1994, strictly prohibits civil servants from committing certain acts, such as, e.g. undertaking work for personal purposes during the hours of service, publishing facts related to their position without prior authorization of the Minister, or exercising a profession forbidden by the particular statute of their body, this prohibition being enforceable with disciplinary sanctions under section 40 of the same Law, without prejudice to possible penal proceedings. While noting that the Government’s report contains no information in this regard, the Committee requests the Government once again to clarify the scope of the penal liability referred to in section 35 and indicate applicable penal sanctions, supplying copies of relevant texts, in order to enable the Committee to assess their compliance with the Convention.

CMNT_TITLE

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

The Committee would be grateful if the Government would communicate, with its next report, copies of the following legislation: the latest updated and consolidated text of the Penal Code and Prison Regulations (as well as any other provisions governing prison labour); the laws governing public assemblies, meetings and gatherings; the law governing labour relations in the maritime transport, to which reference is made in section 1(d) of the Labour Law, 1997, including any disciplinary provisions applicable to seafarers; Circular No. 005 Mosalvy dated 6 March 2000 on the right to strike and Notification No. 20 Mosalvy dated 29 August 2000 on the right to strike of employees, to which reference is made in the report. Please also provide additional information on the following points.

Article , subparagraph a, of the Convention. Punishment for expressing political views. 1. The Committee notes that section 61 of the Provisions relating to the Judiciary and Criminal Law and Procedure applicable in Cambodia during the transitional period, 1992, provides for sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year (which involves compulsory prison labour) for the incitement of national, racial or religious hatred by means of speech or meetings in a public place, or by writings, publications, paintings, films or any other means of audiovisual communication (“incitement to discrimination”). It also notes the provisions of section 41 of the Law on political parties, of 28 October 1997, which make punishable with sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year (involving compulsory prison labour) various offences related to the administration or management of a political party which has been dissolved, or whose activities have been suspended by a court, or whose registration has been refused.

The Committee recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It refers in this connection to paragraph 154 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, where it observed that the Convention does not prohibit punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence, incite to violence or engage in preparatory acts aimed at violence; but sanctions involving compulsory labour fall within the scope of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the expression of views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system. Similar problems of the application of the Convention may arise from restrictions affecting the creation or functioning of associations, where administrative authorities enjoy wide discretionary powers to suspend associations or to prevent their creation, if such restrictions are enforceable with penalties involving compulsory labour.

The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the application of the abovementioned provisions in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their scope, so as to enable the Committee to ascertain whether they are applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

2. The Committee notes that section 12 of the Press Law of 18 July 1995, contains a prohibition to publish or reproduce information that affects national security or political stability, violation of this prohibition being punishable with fines, but also with sanctions under criminal law. Referring to the explanations in point 1 of this direct request, the Committee requests the Government to clarify this provision, indicating the kind of criminal sanctions applicable in case of violation of section 12 and supplying copies of relevant texts, as well as the information on the application of this section in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope and indicating the criminal penalties imposed.

Article 1, subparagraph c. Sanctions applicable to public servants. The Committee notes that section 35 of the Law on the common statute of civil servants, of 26 October 1994, strictly prohibits civil servants from committing certain acts, such as e.g. undertaking work for personal purposes during the hours of service, publishing facts related to their position without prior authorization of the Minister, or exercising a profession forbidden by the particular statute of their body, this prohibition being enforceable with disciplinary sanctions under section 40 of the same Law, without prejudice to possible penal proceedings. Please clarify the scope of the penal liability referred to in section 35 and indicate applicable penal sanctions, supplying copies of relevant texts, in order to enable the Committee to assess their compliance with the Convention.

CMNT_TITLE

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the following matters raised in its previous direct request.

The Committee would be grateful if the Government would communicate, with its next report, copies of the following legislation: the latest updated and consolidated text of the Penal Code and Prison Regulations (as well as any other provisions governing prison labour); the laws governing public assemblies, meetings and gatherings; the law governing labour relations in the maritime transport, to which reference is made in section 1(d) of the Labour Law, 1997, including any disciplinary provisions applicable to seafarers; Circular No. 005 Mosalvy dated 6 March 2000 on the right to strike and Notification No. 20 Mosalvy dated 29 August 2000 on the right to strike of employees, to which reference is made in the report. Please also provide additional information on the following points.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Punishment for expressing political views. 1. The Committee notes that section 61 of the Provisions relating to the Judiciary and Criminal Law and Procedure applicable in Cambodia during the transitional period, 1992, provides for sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year (which involves compulsory prison labour) for the incitement of national, racial or religious hatred by means of speech or meetings in a public place, or by writings, publications, paintings, films or any other means of audiovisual communication (“incitement to discrimination”). It also notes the provisions of section 41 of the Law on political parties, of 28 October 1997, which make punishable with sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year (involving compulsory prison labour) various offences related to the administration or management of a political party which has been dissolved, or whose activities have been suspended by a court, or whose registration has been refused.

The Committee recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It refers in this connection to paragraph 154 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, where it observed that the Convention does not prohibit punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence, incite to violence or engage in preparatory acts aimed at violence; but sanctions involving compulsory labour fall within the scope of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the expression of views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system. Similar problems of the application of the Convention may arise from restrictions affecting the creation or functioning of associations, where administrative authorities enjoy wide discretionary powers to suspend associations or to prevent their creation, if such restrictions are enforceable with penalties involving compulsory labour.

The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the application of the abovementioned provisions in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their scope, so as to enable the Committee to ascertain whether they are applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

2. The Committee notes that section 12 of the Press Law of 18 July 1995, contains a prohibition to publish or reproduce information that affects national security or political stability, violation of this prohibition being punishable with fines, but also with sanctions under criminal law. Referring to the explanations in point 1 of this direct request, the Committee requests the Government to clarify this provision, indicating the kind of criminal sanctions applicable in case of violation of section 12 and supplying copies of relevant texts, as well as the information on the application of this section in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope and indicating the criminal penalties imposed.

Article 1(c). Sanctions applicable to public servants. The Committee notes that section 35 of the Law on the common statute of civil servants, of 26 October 1994, strictly prohibits civil servants from committing certain acts, such as e.g. undertaking work for personal purposes during the hours of service, publishing facts related to their position without prior authorization of the Minister, or exercising a profession forbidden by the particular statute of their body, this prohibition being enforceable with disciplinary sanctions under section 40 of the same Law, without prejudice to possible penal proceedings. Please clarify the scope of the penal liability referred to in section 35 and indicate applicable penal sanctions, supplying copies of relevant texts, in order to enable the Committee to assess their compliance with the Convention.

CMNT_TITLE

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the following matters raised in its previous direct request:

The Committee would be grateful if the Government would communicate, with its next report, copies of the following legislation: the latest updated and consolidated text of the Penal Code and Prison Regulations (as well as any other provisions governing prison labour); the laws governing public assemblies, meetings and gatherings; the law governing labour relations in the maritime transport, to which reference is made in section 1(d) of the Labour Law, 1997, including any disciplinary provisions applicable to seafarers; Circular No. 005 Mosalvy dated 6 March 2000 on the right to strike and Notification No. 20 Mosalvy dated 29 August 2000 on the right to strike of employees, to which reference is made in the report. Please also provide additional information on the following points.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Punishment for expressing political views. 1. The Committee notes that section 61 of the Provisions relating to the Judiciary and Criminal Law and Procedure applicable in Cambodia during the transitional period, 1992, provides for sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year (which involves compulsory prison labour) for the incitement of national, racial or religious hatred by means of speech or meetings in a public place, or by writings, publications, paintings, films or any other means of audiovisual communication (“incitement to discrimination”). It also notes the provisions of section 41 of the Law on political parties, of 28 October 1997, which make punishable with sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year (involving compulsory prison labour) various offences related to the administration or management of a political party which has been dissolved, or whose activities have been suspended by a court, or whose registration has been refused.

The Committee recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It refers in this connection to paragraph 154 of its 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour, where it observed that the Convention does not prohibit punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence, incite to violence or engage in preparatory acts aimed at violence; but sanctions involving compulsory labour fall within the scope of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the expression of views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system. Similar problems of the application of the Convention may arise from restrictions affecting the creation or functioning of associations, where administrative authorities enjoy wide discretionary powers to suspend associations or to prevent their creation, if such restrictions are enforceable with penalties involving compulsory labour.

The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the application of the abovementioned provisions in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their scope, so as to enable the Committee to ascertain whether they are applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

2. The Committee notes that section 12 of the Press Law of 18 July 1995, contains a prohibition to publish or reproduce information that affects national security or political stability, violation of this prohibition being punishable with fines, but also with sanctions under criminal law. Referring to the explanations in point 1 of this direct request, the Committee requests the Government to clarify this provision, indicating the kind of criminal sanctions applicable in case of violation of section 12 and supplying copies of relevant texts, as well as the information on the application of this section in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope and indicating the criminal penalties imposed.

Article 1(c). Sanctions applicable to public servants. The Committee notes that section 35 of the Law on the common statute of civil servants, of 26 October 1994, strictly prohibits civil servants from committing certain acts, such as e.g. undertaking work for personal purposes during the hours of service, publishing facts related to their position without prior authorization of the Minister, or exercising a profession forbidden by the particular statute of their body, this prohibition being enforceable with disciplinary sanctions under section 40 of the same Law, without prejudice to possible penal proceedings. Please clarify the scope of the penal liability referred to in section 35 and indicate applicable penal sanctions, supplying copies of relevant texts, in order to enable the Committee to assess their compliance with the Convention.

CMNT_TITLE

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the following matters raised in its previous direct request:

The Committee would be grateful if the Government would communicate, with its next report, copies of the following legislation: the latest updated and consolidated text of the Penal Code and Prison Regulations (as well as any other provisions governing prison labour); the laws governing public assemblies, meetings and gatherings; the law governing labour relations in the maritime transport, to which reference is made in section 1(d) of the Labour Law, 1997, including any disciplinary provisions applicable to seafarers; Circular No. 005 Mosalvy dated 6 March 2000 on the right to strike and Notification No. 20 Mosalvy dated 29 August 2000 on the right to strike of employees, to which reference is made in the report. Please also provide additional information on the following points.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. 1. The Committee notes that section 61 of the Provisions relating to the Judiciary and Criminal Law and Procedure applicable in Cambodia during the transitional period, 1992, provides for sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year (which involves compulsory prison labour) for the incitement of national, racial or religious hatred by means of speech or meetings in a public place, or by writings, publications, paintings, films or any other means of audiovisual communication (“incitement to discrimination”). It also notes the provisions of section 41 of the Law on political parties, of 28 October 1997, which make punishable with sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year (involving compulsory prison labour) various offences related to the administration or management of a political party which has been dissolved, or whose activities have been suspended by a court, or whose registration has been refused.

The Committee recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It refers in this connection to paragraphs 133 to 140 of its General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour, where it observed that the Convention does not prohibit punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence, incite to violence or engage in preparatory acts aimed at violence; but sanctions involving compulsory labour fall within the scope of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the expression of views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system. Similar problems of the application of the Convention may arise from restrictions affecting the creation or functioning of associations, where administrative authorities enjoy wide discretionary powers to suspend associations or to prevent their creation, if such restrictions are enforceable with penalties involving compulsory labour.

The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the application of the abovementioned provisions in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their scope, so as to enable the Committee to ascertain whether they are applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

2. The Committee notes that section 12 of the Press Law of 18 July 1995, contains a prohibition to publish or reproduce information that affects national security or political stability, violation of this prohibition being punishable with fines, but also with sanctions under criminal law. Referring to the explanations in point 1 of this direct request, the Committee requests the Government to clarify this provision, indicating the kind of criminal sanctions applicable in case of violation of section 12 and supplying copies of relevant texts, as well as the information on the application of this section in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope and indicating the criminal penalties imposed.

Article 1(c). The Committee notes that section 35 of the Law on the common statute of civil servants, of 26 October 1994, strictly prohibits civil servants from committing certain acts, such as e.g. undertaking work for personal purposes during the hours of service, publishing facts related to their position without prior authorization of the Minister, or exercising a profession forbidden by the particular statute of their body, this prohibition being enforceable with disciplinary sanctions under section 40 of the same Law, without prejudice to possible penal proceedings. Please clarify the scope of the penal liability referred to in section 35 and indicate applicable penal sanctions, supplying copies of relevant texts, in order to enable the Committee to assess their compliance with the Convention.

CMNT_TITLE

The Committee has noted with interest the information provided by the Government in its first report on the application of the Convention. It notes, in particular, the Constitution of the Kingdom of Cambodia of 1993, as amended in 1999, the Provisions relating to the Judiciary and Criminal Law and Procedure applicable in Cambodia during the transitional period, adopted by the decision of the Supreme National Council on 10 September 1992, as well as other texts supplied by the Government. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would communicate, with its next report, copies of the following legislation: the latest updated and consolidated text of the Penal Code and Prison Regulations (as well as any other provisions governing prison labour); the laws governing public assemblies, meetings and gatherings; the law governing labour relations in the maritime transport, to which reference is made in section 1(d) of the Labour Law, 1997, including any disciplinary provisions applicable to seafarers; Circular No. 005 Mosalvy dated 6 March 2000 on the right to strike and Notification No. 20 Mosalvy dated 29 August 2000 on the right to strike of employees, to which reference is made in the report. Please also provide additional information on the following points.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. 1. The Committee notes that section 61 of the Provisions relating to the Judiciary and Criminal Law and Procedure applicable in Cambodia during the transitional period, 1992, provides for sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year (which involves compulsory prison labour) for the incitement of national, racial or religious hatred by means of speech or meetings in a public place, or by writings, publications, paintings, films or any other means of audiovisual communication ("incitement to discrimination"). It also notes the provisions of section 41 of the Law on political parties, of 28 October 1997, which make punishable with sanctions of imprisonment for a term of up to one year (involving compulsory prison labour) various offences related to the administration or management of a political party which has been dissolved, or whose activities have been suspended by a court, or whose registration has been refused.

The Committee recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It refers in this connection to paragraphs 133 to 140 of its General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour, where it observed that the Convention does not prohibit punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence, incite to violence or engage in preparatory acts aimed at violence; but sanctions involving compulsory labour fall within the scope of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the expression of views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system. Similar problems of the application of the Convention may arise from restrictions affecting the creation or functioning of associations, where administrative authorities enjoy wide discretionary powers to suspend associations or to prevent their creation, if such restrictions are enforceable with penalties involving compulsory labour.

The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the application of the abovementioned provisions in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating their scope, so as to enable the Committee to ascertain whether they are applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

2. The Committee notes that section 12 of the Press Law of 18 July 1995, contains a prohibition to publish or reproduce information that affects national security or political stability, violation of this prohibition being punishable with fines, but also with sanctions under criminal law. Referring to the explanations in point 1 of this direct request, the Committee requests the Government to clarify this provision, indicating the kind of criminal sanctions applicable in case of violation of section 12 and supplying copies of relevant texts, as well as the information on the application of this section in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope and indicating the criminal penalties imposed.

Article 1(c). The Committee notes that section 35 of the Law on the common statute of civil servants, of 26 October 1994, strictly prohibits civil servants from committing certain acts, such as e.g. undertaking work for personal purposes during the hours of service, publishing facts related to their position without prior authorization of the Minister, or exercising a profession forbidden by the particular statute of their body, this prohibition being enforceable with disciplinary sanctions under section 40 of the same Law, without prejudice to possible penal proceedings. Please clarify the scope of the penal liability referred to in section 35 and indicate applicable penal sanctions, supplying copies of relevant texts, in order to enable the Committee to assess their compliance with the Convention.