Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Czechia (Ratification: 1996)

1. The Committee has noted the information provided by the Government in reply to its earlier comments, including a number of legislative texts supplied by the Government. It has noted with interest the Government’s indication in the report that Government Decree No. 284 of 1992, concerning measures of economic mobilization to increase defensive capacity in times of threat or in normal conditions, to which the Committee referred in its previous direct request, was repealed by Government Decree No. 500/2000, which entered into force on 31 December 2000. The Committee would appreciate it if the Government would supply a copy of the repealing Decree with its next report.

2. The Committee has also noted the Government’s reply to the observations made by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) in October 2001, which it has been examining in its comments made under Convention No. 29, likewise ratified by the Czech Republic.

3. The Committee has noted the provisions of sections 158(1)(c) and 159(1) of the Criminal Code, according to which a public official who fails to fulfil a duty pursuant to his office or whose negligence thwarts or makes substantially difficult the execution of an important task shall be punishable with imprisonment (which involves an obligation to perform prison labour pursuant to section 29(1) of the Imprisonment Act No. 169/1999 SB of 30 June 1999). The Committee requests the Government to provide, in its next report, the information on the application of the above provisions in practice, including copies of court decisions defining or illustrating their scope, so as to enable the Committee to assess their conformity with Article 1(c) of the Convention.

4. The Committee has noted a provision of section 97(1) of the Criminal Code, which makes punishable with imprisonment (involving compulsory labour) any act (such as abuse of employment, profession, position or office, etc.) causing a breakdown in the work of a state organ or economic organization or other institution. The Committee would appreciate it if the Government would provide information on the application of this provision in practice, supplying copies of the court decisions defining or illustrating its scope, so as to enable the Committee to ascertain whether this provision is not applicable in the situations covered by Article 1(d).