Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111) - Pakistan (Ratification: 1961)

1. The All Pakistan Federation of Trade Unions (APFTU) has communicated two information documents to the Committee. The first information was contained in a communication dated 25 June 1999 and alleged the violation by the Government of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), and the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111), following the adoption of Ordinances Nos. V/1999, VI/1999, VIII/1999, IX/1999 and X/1999 amending the legislation governing enterprises which supply water and electricity. With regard to the alleged violation of Convention No. 111, the APFTU does not indicate the grounds of discrimination prohibited by the Convention (race, colour, sex, religion, political opinion, national extraction or social origin) which are violated by the above Ordinances. The Committee is not therefore able to take a position on the matter and requests the APFTU to provide additional information so that it can examine the above allegations. The second set of information is contained in a communication dated 23 July 1999 and alleges the violation of numerous Conventions, including the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111), and the Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144). According to the APFTU, although it has ratified Convention No. 144 which advocates tripartite consultations on, among other matters, the ILO Conventions ratified by a member State, the Government has not held consultations with employers' and workers' organizations to facilitate the declaration and pursuance of a national policy to promote equality of opportunity and treatment in respect of employment and occupation, as envisaged by Convention No. 111. The APFTU also emphasizes the failure to establish a formal tripartite consultation procedure, as required by Convention No. 144. On this latter point, please refer to the Committee's comments under Convention No. 144. The Committee invites the Government to reply to the APFTU's allegations concerning the application of Convention No. 111.

2. Discrimination on the basis of religion. In its previous comments, the Committee hoped that the Government would review section 295C of the Penal Code, or the "Blasphemy Law", which provides that anyone guilty of defiling the name of the Prophet Mohammed could be subjected to the death penalty, and sections 298B and 298C of the Penal Code, which establish sentences of imprisonment for up to three years for any members of the Quadiani, Lahori and Ahmadi religious groups who, inter alia, preach or propagate their faith, whether by spoken or written words, or by visible representation. It also requested the Government to reconsider its position with regard to the declaration required to obtain passports, to the effect that the founder of the Ahmadi movement was a liar and an impostor, which is designed to prevent non-Muslims from obtaining passports which identify them as Muslims. In its report, the Government once again repeats that the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution and particularly in articles 20, 27 and 36 on religious freedom and the prohibition of any discrimination based on religion, apply to all the citizens of Pakistan, including religious minorities. The Government states that the blasphemy laws are not discriminatory, since they apply to the whole of the population, and not only to certain groups, and they protect all religions, not only Islam. With regard to the declaration to be signed to obtain Muslim passports, the Government also repeats the same arguments which it put forward previously, namely that under article 60(3)(b) of the Constitution, Ahmadis/Quadianis are not Muslims and that they violate the Constitution when they declare themselves to be Muslims on the application form for passports. Finally, in more general terms, it explains that the legislation criticized by the Committee does not affect the access to employment, training or conditions of employment of Ahmadis/Quadianis and that it therefore has no bearing on the application of the Convention.

3. The Committee is therefore bound to express its concern once again that the enjoyment of equality of opportunity and treatment in respect of education and employment for certain religious minorities is necessarily impaired by the application of the measures referred to above. In this respect, it is bound to regret the fact that the Government has not provided statistical data on the professional situation of the various religious minorities, including the Ahmadis, with particular regard to their access to employment and their conditions of employment. As it emphasized in its previous comment, the Committee recalls that this point of view is also shared by the Special Rapporteur to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights and by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (E/CN.4/1995/91, 22 December 1994). For this reason, it once again hopes that the Government will reconsider its position with regard to sections 295C, 298B and 298C of the Penal Code and the declaration required to obtain passports. The Committee also hopes that the Government will provide detailed information on the measures taken to guarantee in practice non-discrimination on the basis of religion for all aspects of employment (that is access to vocational training, employment and the various occupations, as well as terms and conditions of employment). Finally, the Committee notes the report presented by the Government in 1996 to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD/C/299/Add.6) and welcomes the many institutions which have been established (Minorities Affairs Division, National Commission for Minorities, Federal Advisory Council for Minorities Affairs, District Minorities Committees, National Committee on the Kalash People, etc.) to promote and protect minority rights. The Committee notes that the Government has not provided information on the strategy implemented by the Minorities Affairs Division of the Federal Government or on the work of the National Commission for Minorities, and it once again requests information on these points. The Committee also notes that the project on the development and strengthening of governmental and non-governmental institutional capacity for the promotion of human rights, implemented by the ILO, commenced in June 1999. It requests the Government to keep it regularly informed of the implementation of the various stages of the project, and the results obtained.

4. Discrimination on the basis of sex. In its previous comment, the Committee noted the fact that, according to the report of the Commission of Inquiry for Women published in August 1997, the illiteracy rate for women was 80 per cent in 1990. It notes the Government's statement that there is no discrimination in education or vocational training on the basis of any of the seven grounds of discrimination prohibited by the Convention, including sex. The Committee welcomes the many initiatives taken by the Government to raise the educational level of women, such as: universal compulsory primary education for girls and boys of 5 to 9 years of age; the efforts made by the Government to increase the enrolment of girls, particularly in rural areas; awareness campaigns to combat illiteracy; the increase in the numbers of public education institutions, as well as private institutions, through financial incentives; the increase in the number of teachers, and particularly women teachers; etc. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information on the impact of these various initiatives on the illiteracy rate of women.

5. The Committee notes that there are a very large number of public and private institutions, at both the federal and provincial levels, providing vocational training. However, the Government's statements suggest that the emphasis in vocational training for women is placed on training for occupations which are considered to be particularly appropriate for women workers, such as tailoring, embroidery, secretarial skills, computer operators, food processing, etc. The Committee also notes that the Government is encouraging girls to opt for scientific subjects. The Committee would therefore be grateful if the Government would indicate the measures which have been taken or are envisaged to combat segregation in training on gender grounds (for example, by guiding girls towards less traditional occupations and by adopting education policies designed to promote a positive attitude towards the capacities and aspirations of women) and to combat discrimination against women in relation to access to employment and the various occupations. Finally, it once again requests the Government to indicate the measures which have been taken or are envisaged to give effect to the recommendations made in 1997 by the Commission of Inquiry for Women, and particularly its recommendation that a detailed examination be made of laws and regulations that discriminate against women, with the aim of proposing amendments and other remedial measures. It also requests it to provide information on the progress made by the project to establish a national training and resource centre.

6. Special industrial zones (SIZs) and export processing zones (EPZs). Noting that the Government has not replied to certain points raised in its previous comment, the Committee hopes that it will indicate in its next report whether the labour legislation is applicable to SIZs and requests it to provide information on the measures taken to ensure the application in practice of the principle of non-discrimination in EPZs, particularly with regard to terms and conditions of employment.