National Legislation on Labour and Social Rights
Global database on occupational safety and health legislation
Employment protection legislation database
Display in: French - SpanishView all
1. Since 1999, the Committee has examined the measures taken by the Government in giving effect to the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry appointed by the Governing Body to examine the observance by Myanmar of the Convention. In 1999 and 2000, two orders were issued to render the requisition of forced labour illegal and subject to penal sanction. Since then the ILO has been involved in a number of activities to follow up the recommendation of the Commission of Inquiry. Between May 2000 and February 2002, several technical cooperation missions were undertaken in Myanmar by a representative of the Director General. In September-October 2001, a High-Level Team visited Myanmar to conduct an assessment of the measures taken by the Government in regard to the application of the Convention. In March 2002, as recommended by the HLT, the Government agreed to the appointment of an ILO Liaison Officer in Myanmar in order to assist the Government to ensure the prompt and effective elimination of forced labour. A Liaison Officer ad interim was appointed in May 2002. Since October 2002 a permanent Liaison Officer has been functioning, and reports on the activities of the Liaison Officer, including her travels in the country and her discussions with the authorities, are presented at each session of the Governing Body. On 27 May 2003, the Government and the ILO reached agreement on a Joint Plan of Action for the Elimination of Forced Labour Practices in Myanmar.
2. In 2002, in concluding its observation, the Committee noted that some measures had been taken by the Government to disseminate the prohibition of forced labour and that discussions were under way between the ILO and the Government on a plan of action. The Committee, however, observed that in spite of the indications and rhetoric of the Government, none of the three recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry - namely that the relevant legislative texts be amended; that in actual practice no more forced or compulsory labour be imposed by the authorities, in particular the military; and that the penalties provided for by the Penal Code for the exaction of forced labour be strictly enforced - had so far been met.
3. The Committee takes note of the discussions in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in June 2003 (Provisional Record No. 24, Part three). It also notes the statements made by the representative of the Government in the Governing Body and at the Conference Committee, as well as the following reports and information supplied by the Government:
- further progress report concerning the implementation of Convention No. 29, dated 4 February 2003;
- further developments on Convention No. 29, dated 24 March 2003;
- replies to comments made by the Committee of Experts, dated 30 May 2003 (received on 6 June 2003);
- report on the application of Convention No. 29, received on 2 October 2003;
- five letters addressed to the Liaison Officer by representatives of the Government in the Convention No. 29 Implementation Committee, including the representative of the Ministry of Defence, in October and November 2003, replying to questions raised in the Implementation Committee.
4. The Committee has also taken note of the following information:
- the reports on "Developments concerning the question of the observance by the Government of Myanmar of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29)", presented to the Governing Body at its 285th (November 2002), 286th (March 2003) and 287th (November 2003) Sessions, which include the reports of the Liaison Officer;
- the discussions and conclusions of the Governing Body on these reports (GB.288/PV);
- a communication dated 20 November 2003, in which the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) submitted fresh documentation referring to the continuing recourse to forced labour in Myanmar. A copy of this communication was transmitted to the Government on 30 November 2003 for such comments it may wish to present.
5. As in previous years, the Committee will examine the observance of the Convention by the Government under three main parts: (i) the amendment of legislation; (ii) the measures taken to stop the exaction in practice of forced or compulsory labour and information available on actual practice; and (iii) the enforcement of penalties which may be imposed under the Penal Code for the exaction of forced or compulsory labour. The Committee shall then review the measures taken in regard to the Joint Plan of Action (iv).
6. In its report, the Commission of Inquiry had urged the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that the Village Act, 1907, and the Towns Act, 1907, which confer local authorities wide powers to requisition labour and services in violation of the Convention, be brought into line with the Convention without further delay. In its 2001 observation, the Committee noted that, although the Village Act and Towns Act still needed to be amended, an "Order directing not to exercise powers under certain provisions of the Town Act, 1907, and the Village Act, 1907" (Order No. 1/99), as modified by an "Order Supplementary to Order No. 1/99" dated 27 October 2000, could provide a statutory basis for ensuring compliance with the Convention in practice, if given bona fide effect not only by the local authorities empowered to requisition labour under the Village and Towns Acts, but also by civilian and military officials entitled to call on the assistance of local authorities under the Acts.
7. The Committee notes that, as at the end of November 2003, the amendment of the Village and Towns Acts has still not been made. Noting the Government’s statement in its reply to the Committee’s comments dated 30 May 2003 that Order No. 1/99 and its supplementary order have the force of law and the Towns Act and the Village Act are no longer referred to, the Committee trusts that the Government will therefore have no difficulty in repealing the relevant provisions of these Acts, in order to bring the legislation fully into conformity with the Convention. Pending this, the Committee trusts that the Government will make every effort to ensure that the prohibition on forced labour contained in Order No. 1/99 and its supplementary order is strictly applied and enforced.
8. In its recommendations, the Commission of Inquiry had stressed that besides amending the legislation, concrete action needed to be taken immediately to stop the imposition of forced labour in practice, in particular by the military. In the Commission’s view, this was all the more important since the powers to impose compulsory labour appear to be taken for granted, without any reference to the Village or Towns Acts. In its previous observations, the Committee had identified four areas in which action needed to be taken by the Government in order to achieve this goal: issuing specific and concrete instructions to the civilian and military authorities; giving wide publicity to the prohibition of forced labour; making adequate budgetary provisions for the replacement of forced or unpaid labour; and monitoring the prohibition of forced labour.
9. Specific and concrete instructions. In its observations in 2001 and 2002, the Committee noted that, in the absence of specific and concrete instructions to the civilian and military authorities containing a description of the various forms and manners of exaction of forced labour, the application of the provisions adopted so far turns upon the interpretation in practice of the notion of "forced labour". This cannot be taken for granted, as shown by the various Burmese terms used sometimes when labour was exacted from the population - including "loh-ah-pay", "voluntary", or "donated" labour.
10. In its 2002 observation, the Committee took note of a Directive issued on 1 November 2000 by Secretary 1 of the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) (Letter No. 4/Na ya ka U/Ma Nya) directing "the State and Divisional Peace and Development Councils to issue necessary instructions to the relevant District and Township Peace and Development Councils to strictly abide by the prohibitions contained in Order No. 1/99) and its supplementary order". The Committee notes that the reports of the Government and the statements made by representatives of the Government contain many references to "explanations", "instructions" and "directives" given at offices of the Peace and Development Councils at various levels and offices of the General Administration Department, the Department of Justice and the police forces and township courts, and to the guidance provided by the Field Observation Teams during their visits in the country. However, the Government has supplied no details on the contents of the explanations, instructions, directives or guidance, nor has it provided the text of any instruction or directive which contains details of the tasks for which the requisition of labour is prohibited or the manner in which the same tasks are to be performed without resorting to forced labour.
11. In its reply to the Committee’s observation dated 30 May 2003, the Government indicates that the Myanmar Police Force has issued further directives and explanations with regard to Order No. 1/99 and its supplementary order to police force personnel in order that they may be made more aware of their obligations to the public concerning the "full meaning of the use of forced labour", and provides a copy of Letter No. 1002 (3) /202/G4 "to prevent illicit summon on the requisition of forced labour", dated 27 October 2000 and signed by the Director-General of the Police Force. The Committee notes that this Letter again draws attention to the contents of Order No. 1/99 and its supplementary order, and indicates the procedure to be followed by police officers in dealing with complaints on forced labour, without explaining the kind of tasks which constitute forced labour or how these tasks should be performed.
12. Regarding the defence forces, the Committee notes, from the written reply given to the Liaison Officer by the representative of the Ministry of Defence in the Convention No. 29 Implementation Committee, the reference made to a letter of 2001 of the Office of the Minister of Defence "instructing that the orders be made comprehensive to the staff at the lower levels" in its main offices and directorates, and two letters of 1999 and 2000 and a telegram of 2001 issued by the Office of the Chief of Staff (Army) "to make personnel to the lowest level will follow orders explicitly". The Committee requests the Government to supply copies of these letters and telegram with its next report.
13. On the basis of the information available to the Committee, it appears that clear instructions are still required to indicate to all officials concerned, including members of the armed forces, both the kinds of practices that constitute forced labour and for which the requisition of labour is prohibited, and the manner in which the same tasks are henceforth to be performed. The Committee notes that in the September 2003 meeting of the Convention No. 29 Implementation Committee, it was pointed out to the Liaison Officer that there could be differences of opinion over whether certain practices constituted forced labour and that it was important to take into account the traditional customs of the country. The Liaison Officer offered to meet with a small group of the Implementation Committee to develop common concepts relating to the application of Convention No. 29 in the Myanmar context, the results of which could be reflected in a pamphlet for public distribution. The Committee hopes that with the assistance of the Liaison Officer, the necessary detailed instructions will be issued without delay, and that they will, inter alia, cover each of the tasks listed in paragraph 13 of its 2002 observation.
14. Publicity given to orders. The Committee notes from the information supplied by the Government that measures continue to be taken in order to make the prohibition of forced labour contained in Order No. 1/99 and its supplementary order widely known by all the authorities concerned and the general public. These measures include:
- distributing and posting copies of the orders at various administrative levels throughout the country;
- including information on Convention No. 29 in the monthly bulletin of the Ministry of Labour, which is widely circulated;
- preparing a pamphlet on forced labour and Convention No. 29;
- sending Field Observations Teams led by members of the Convention No. 29 Implementation Committee to various parts of the country, to make the local authorities and the public aware of the orders; and translating the orders into ethnic languages.
15. The Committee recalls that in its 2001 observation, it referred to an allegation made by the ICFTU to the effect that villagers had to forcibly buy the "green book" containing the text of the orders, or were forced to purchase the boards on which the orders had to be posted. The Committee takes note of the Government’s reply that according to the General Administration Department the "green books" were distributed free of charge, at no cost to anyone.
16. In its communication received in November 2002, the ICFTU also alleged that "in certain areas villagers had never heard of any orders from Rangoon to the effect that forced labour was now banned, and that many villagers interviewed in Shan State, Karenni State, Karen State, Pegu Division and Mandalay Division still had never heard of announcements or proclamations that forced labour practices should be ended". The Government has provided no answer to this allegation.
17. Regarding the translation of the orders into ethnic languages, the Committee notes that as at the end of November 2003, the orders had been translated and published in two dialects of the Kayin language, Kayah, Mon, Shan and Kachin, and copies of these translations have been communicated to the ILO. It hopes that the next report of the Government will contain copies of the translations into the four Chin dialects.
18. The Committee notes the statement contained in the Liaison Officer’s first report to the November 2003 session of the Governing Body, to the effect that "there is so far no indication that the translations have been distributed and displayed in the ethnic areas".
19. The Committee expresses the hope that the Government will continue its efforts to give the widest publicity to the prohibition of forced labour throughout the country, including in the remote areas where most of the allegations of continuing forced labour refer to. In particular:
(a) As the measures taken until now appear to be addressed mainly if not exclusively to the civilian authorities, the Committee requests the Government in its next report to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to make the members of the defence forces at all levels fully aware of the existing orders and of the sanctions for their violation. The Government is requested to provide copies of the information provided to the defence forces as well as information about meetings, workshops and seminars organized to disseminate the information to the defence forces.
(b) As the Field Observation Teams of the Convention No. 29 Implementation Committee do not cover all the 16 states and divisions in the country, the Committee hopes that the work of the Implementation Committee will be extended to cover the whole country and that the next report will contain information on the progress made in this regard.
(c) The Committee hopes that the pamphlet which has been in preparation since last year will be finalized soon, with the advice of the Liaison Office, and that a copy will be provided with the next report.
(d) The Committee trusts that measures will be taken to ensure the distribution and display of the translations in the ethnic areas, which are those where the prevalence of forced labour practices appear to be the highest.
20. Budgeting of adequate means. In its recommendations, the Commission of Inquiry had drawn attention to the need to make adequate budgetary provisions to hire free wage labour for the public activities which are today based on forced and unpaid labour. In its report, the High-Level Team stated that it had received no information allowing it to conclude that the authorities had indeed provided for any real substitute for the cost-free forced labour imposed to support the military or public works projects. In its two previous observations, the Committee has pursued the matter and sought to obtain concrete evidence that adequate budgetary provisions exist to hire voluntary paid labour.
21. In its reply of 30 May 2003, the Government reiterates its previous statements that there is always a budget allotment for each and every project, with allocations which include the cost of material and labour. This has been the case for each project carried out by the Department for the Development of Border Areas. In addition, the Department under the Yangon City Development Committee, the Ministry of Construction and the Ministry of Home Affairs have issued instructions "to strictly follow the rules concerning the hiring of labour, forbidding any form of forced labour as regards the provisions for labour costs".
22. The Committee takes note of this statement. However, as the information available on actual practice shows that forced labour continues to be imposed in many parts of the country, in particular in those areas with a heavy presence of the army, the Committee can only conclude that the budgetary allocations that may exist are not adequate to make recourse to forced labour unnecessary unless the use of these allocations is not adequately controlled. In this regard, it draws attention to the Liaison Officer’s comment in her first report to the March 2003 session of the Governing Body that the dissemination of Order No. 1/99 and its supplementary order has not been sufficient to have a significant impact on the practice, as it has not been accompanied by other measures, such as providing alternative means to those currently imposing forced labour to carry out the tasks which is their responsibility to perform. The Committee reiterates the hope that adequate budgetary provisions will be made for the civilian and for the military authorities to allow them to carry out their tasks without using forced labour and that the next report will indicate the measures taken in this regard.
23. Monitoring machinery. The Committee takes note of the information supplied by the Government and the reports of the Liaison Officer on the activities carried out by the Convention No. 29 Implementation Committee in monitoring the forced labour situation and making the public aware of the orders prohibiting forced labour. Between December 2002 and November 2003, the Implementation Committee held three meetings with the Liaison Officer, in which a number of allegations of forced labour transmitted by the Liaison Officer were discussed. In these meetings, the newly appointed representative of the Ministry of Defence participated, which allowed certain issues concerning the use of forced labour by the army to be discussed. The Field Observation Teams of the Implementation Committee undertook frequent field trips in the country, to investigate allegations of forced labour and disseminate knowledge about the orders and reports on their findings were made to the Implementation Committee. In addition, the Liaison Officer received several written communications from the Implementation Committee, reporting on findings of the Field Observation Teams on the allegations transmitted by the Liaison Officer.
24. The Committee welcomes the dialogue which has developed between the Implementation Committee and the Liaison Officer. It notes however that all the investigations carried out by the authorities, including the FOTs, on allegations of forced labour have concluded that these allegations were unfounded. In this regard, it notes that as part of her proposals to the Government on a Joint Plan of Action, the Liaison Officer had made specific suggestions for a reformed system of inspection, which were not retained by the Government. The Committee also notes that following a request by the Liaison Officer, the Government agreed to let her accompany Field Observation Team on a field trip to Kachin State, in order to observe its methods of work. The Liaison Officer’s observation, as reported in her second report to the November 2003 session of the Governing Body, was that "the manner in which the team conducted its work, while appropriate for information dissemination, was not well suited to investigating allegations and that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to determine the veracity of allegations in such a manner". The Committee trusts that the Government will take steps to develop a fair and more effective procedure for investigating allegations of forced labour, in particular those involving the army, and that it will continue its dialogue with the Liaison Officer in this regard.
25. During its visit to Myanmar in October 2001, the High-Level Team had found that "although the orders prohibiting forced labour had been widely, if unevenly, distributed, the impact on the practice of forced labour was limited and there had been only a very moderate positive evolution since the Commission of Inquiry. The situation remained particularly serious in places with a large military presence, especially in border areas".
26. In its 2001 and 2002 observations, the Committee noted two communications of the ICFTU which contained a large number of allegations, many of them referring to the continued use by the military authorities of Burma of forced labour on a massive scale. In support of its claims, the ICFTU enclosed a large number of reports and other documents, totalling hundreds of pages, which often included interviews and precise indications of times, places, military battalions or companies involved, and the names of the commanders. The Committee had hoped that the Government would examine the allegations made by the ICFTU and supply detailed information on any action taken to prosecute all persons found responsible for ordering forced labour. The Committee notes that with the exception of two allegations, which were raised by the Liaison Officer in the Convention No. 29 Implementation Committee, the Government has provided no information in reply to the communications of the ICFTU. On the two allegations, which concerned the death of trade unionist U Saw Mya Than, while forced to work as a porter for the army, and the use of forced labour by TotalFinElf to build a highway between Kanbauk and Maung Ma Gan, the Government’s answers were that in both cases, no forced labour had been used and the allegations were aimed at tarnishing the image of the Government.
27. In her first report presented to the Governing Body in March 2003, the Liaison Officer stated her impression that "while there is probably less use of forced labour in central parts of Myanmar, the situation in areas near the Thai border where there is continuing insecurity and a heavy presence of the army, as well as in Northern Rakhine State, is particularly serious and appears to have changed little (since the HLT mission)". This impression is reiterated in her first report to the November 2003 session of the Governing Body, in which she states:
The Liaison Officer continues to receive credible reports of forced labour from various sources inside and outside the country, and fresh allegations have come to light during the recent trips to various parts of the country. The Liaison Officer continues to be concerned by the question of forced recruitment into the armed forces, including of children, on which no detailed response has been received from the authorities. Another matter which has come to the attention of the Liaison Officer is the current widespread and apparently systematic programme of military training for civilians, affecting very large numbers of people across the country since May. Trainees include government employees (for example, teachers), as well as local villagers and townspeople, who are required to participate in this training and in some cases also have to cover the cost of materials (such as bamboo sticks).
28. Regarding the forced recruitment of children into the army, the Committee has noted the answer provided by the representative of the Ministry of Defence in the Implementation Committee and repeated in his letter to the Liaison Officer, that the armed forces only recruit in accordance with the laws and regulations in force and since the Defence Services Act, 1959, provides that only those between the ages of 18 and 25 may be recruited voluntarily, there is no forced recruitment into the armed forces, and no young persons have been found to be recruited into the armed forces. The Committee requests the government to provide information on any investigation that may have been undertaken to ascertain that in practice no person under 18 is recruited into the armed forces. In view of the seriousness of the issue, the Committee hopes that the Government, with the assistance of the ILO, will make every effort to make a thorough assessment of the extent of this practice and will take necessary action to put an end to it.
29. Regarding the programmes of compulsory military training, the Committee notes from the letter of the representative of the Ministry of Defence to the Liaison Officer that "they are done as mentioned in the previous Constitutions saying that ... the State may in a particular part of the country or all over the country conduct military trainings"; "every citizen shall in accordance with law: (a) undergo military training; and (b) undertake military service for the defence of the State"; and "the basic trainings (are) conducted so as to protect the State from all forms of destructive elements". The Committee observes that the previous Constitutions are no longer in force; that in any event the obligation that they impose on citizens to undergo military training or service is "in accordance with the law"; and that the Defence Services Act, 1959, only provides for voluntary, and not compulsory, recruitment. It would appear therefore that the programmes of compulsory military training have no legal basis and constitute a form of forced or compulsory labour under the Convention. The Committee hopes that the Government will put an end to these programmes and that in its next report it will indicate the measures taken in this regard.
30. In a letter dated 19 November 2003, the ICFTU transmits information on actual practice coming from various sources and covering many parts of the country (Chin, Kayah, Kayin, Mon, Rakhine and Shan States and Ayeyarwady, Magway, Sagaing and Taninthayi Divisions) over the period September 2002 to October 2003. The ICFTU states that this information "ranges from extortion of money and goods in exchange for exemption from forced labour to violent death during forced portering and serving as ‘human minesweepers’ for the armed forces". The documents appended to the ICFTU letter include:
- An August 2003 report by the Karen Human Rights Group containing translations of some 200 orders mostly from the Myanmar army to villages, requisitioning labour for various tasks as well as materials. There are also translations of more than 100 orders summoning village heads to meetings with the army, at which it is alleged that verbal demands for forced labour were made.
- Documents from the Federation of Trade Unions of Burma (FTUB) containing 17 similar orders from the army to villagers requisitioning labour or materials.
- Three reports from Forum Asia dated 2 December 2002, 29 May 2003 and 31 August 2003 which include numerous allegations of forced labour in Northern Rakhine State, in particular affecting the Muslim population.
- Documents from the FTUB containing details of interviews with 73 villagers who allege they were requisitioned for forced labour. In addition, the documents contain details of interviews with a number of prisoners who had escaped after allegedly being sent to work as porters for the army.
- A document dated February 2003 from the Pa’An Agriculture Workers Union concerning forced labour allegedly requisitioned from 12 villages for a road project in Kayin State.
The Committee requests the Government to examine the allegations of the ICFTU and the documents attached thereto and to supply detailed information on its investigations and any action taken thereupon to prosecute persons found responsible for ordering forced labour.
31. In summary, on the basis of the information at its disposal on actual practice, the Committee must conclude that while there may have been some decrease in forced labour since the report of the Commission of Inquiry in 1998, in particular for civil infrastructure work, forced labour continues to be exacted in many parts of the country. The situation is particularly serious in the border areas which are mostly inhabited by ethnic nationalities and where there is a heavy presence of the army. This clearly shows that in spite of the commitment to the elimination of forced labour expressed repeatedly by the Government the measures taken until now have not been sufficient to bring about rapid and significant progress, in particular as concerns the army.
32. In its report, the Commission of Inquiry urged the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that the penalties which may be imposed under section 374 of the Penal Code for the exaction of forced labour or compulsory labour be strictly enforced, in conformity with Article 25 of the Convention. This, in the Commission’s view, required thorough investigation, prosecution and adequate punishment of those found guilty.
33. The Committee notes, from the information provided by the Government, that although the Order supplementing Order No. 1/99 and the Directive dated 1 November 2000 from the Secretary 1 of the State Peace and Development Council provide for the prosecution under section 374 of the Penal Code of persons responsible for violating the prohibition on forced labour contained in Order No. 1/99, as of November 2003, no sanction has ever been imposed under section 374 of the Penal Code. Similarly, no complaint concerning the imposition of forced labour has been received until now, although procedures exist for such complaints to be filed, inter alia, at a police station in a court of law or at the Office of the Attorney-General.
34. The Committee is of the opinion that the lack of complaints and prosecutions under section 374 of the Penal Code cannot be taken as indicating that there is no forced labour. Rather, it casts doubt on the credibility of the existing complaint and investigation mechanism and on the real commitment of the Government to completely eliminate forced labour.
35. The Committee recalls that in order to overcome the feeling of fear and the lack of trust in the system of redress which in its view was the reason for the lack of complaints and prosecutions, the High-Level Team had suggested the appointment of an ombudsman, to whom complaints regarding forced labour could be submitted and who would have a mandate and the necessary means to conduct direct investigations without fear or favour and with the required confidence of all parties concerned.
36. The Committee notes with interest that in the Joint Plan of Action agreed on 27 May 2003 between the Government and the ILO, the Government accepted the establishment of an independent Facilitator to receive complaints of forced labour and assist victims in obtaining redress under the national legislation. Under the Formal Understanding on the Facilitator, the Facilitator shall perform his/her functions in strict confidentiality and have free access to the complainant and witnesses and no measures of any kind shall be taken by the authorities against the complainants and witnesses. When seized with a prima facie case of subjection to forced labour, the Facilitator may seek an informal solution with the authority concerned, or transmit the complaint to the competent authority to initiate legal proceedings and take necessary action, and he/she shall be informed of the decisions reached. The Facilitator and his/her assistance and support shall be extended the facilities, assistance, protection and status necessary to carry out their function effectively and in full independence and impartiality. The services of the Facilitator will be available in the whole country and will be tested in the pilot region established in the Plan of Action.
37. The Committee considers that, if applied in good faith, the Formal Understanding on the Facilitator could be an important tool in assisting victims of forced labour to make complaints and obtain redress, and result in the prosecution and punishment of persons responsible for imposing forced labour. As indicated below, the Committee hopes that the Government will take the necessary steps to make it possible for the Understanding to be implemented as soon as possible.
38. Following the appointment of an ILO Liaison Officer in Yangon, the Director-General had suggested to the Minister for Labour the development of a plan of action capable of making a concrete and verifiable impact towards the complete elimination of forced labour. The Committee notes with interest that, as a result of the discussions which took place over the last year between the Liaison Officer and the authorities in Yangon and between representatives of the Director-General and representatives of the Government in Geneva, a Joint Plan of Action for the Elimination of Forced Labour Practices in Myanmar was agreed on 27 May 2003. The Plan consists of a plan of action proposed by the Government, with a number of work programmes covering, inter alia, dissemination of information and awareness-raising programmes on the prohibition of forced labour, the expansion of animal transportation as an alternative to the use of porters, and the work of Field Observation Teams; a Formal Understanding on the Facilitator, described in paragraph 36 above, and a Formal Understanding on a pilot region. The pilot region is a region where the prohibition of forced labour will be strictly enforced and where a number of activities, including a local road construction project, will be implemented with the technical assistance and support of the ILO. The designated region is the Myeik District, consisting of four townships in the Tanintharyi Division in the south of the country.
39. The Joint Plan of Action was discussed at the 91st Session of the International Labour Conference during the special sitting on Myanmar of the Committee on the Application of Standards (hereinafter called "Special Sitting"). On this occasion, a Government representative stated that the Joint Plan of Action was a breakthrough, a landmark agreement which was the outcome of a long process of continuous and intensive negotiations and recalled his Government’s determination and commitment to resolving the issue of forced labour and to implement it. The Conference Committee welcomed the Plan of Action as follows:
The Committee welcomed the fact that the Government and the ILO has agreed on 27 May 2003 on a Joint Plan of Action for the elimination of forced labour and expressed its support for this Plan. It also noted with interest that, on the basis of the suggestion made by the HLT, the Plan envisaged the designation of an independent Facilitator to assist victims of forced labour to obtain redress under national legislation. It was noted that the Facilitator would carry out his function throughout the country. Under the Plan of Action, the Government had undertaken to strictly enforce the prohibition on forced labour in the pilot region. While emphasizing that the implementation of the Plan of Action was without prejudice to the general obligation of the Government to put an end to forced labour in the whole of the country, the Committee felt that this Plan of Action, if it was applied in good faith, could enable tangible progress to be made in the elimination of forced labour and could open the way to more substantial progress. The Committee urged the Government to take all the measures required for this purpose.
40. At the same time, the Conference Committee noted in the Special Sitting that its debate was taking place at a moment when the climate of uncertainty and fear prevailing in the country as a result of recent events called seriously into question the will and ability of the authorities to make significant progress in the elimination of forced labour. The Committee expressed the view that:
... a climate of uncertainty and intimidation did not provide an environment in which the Plan of Action, and in particular the facilitator mechanism which it established, could be implemented in a credible manner. The Committee trusted that the Government would take the necessary measures to bring an end to this situation. The Committee hoped that the implementation of the Plan of Action would go ahead as soon as the Director General considered the conditions were met for its effective implementation.
41. The Committee shares the concern of the Conference Committee that a climate of fear and intimidation is not an environment where the Joint Plan of Action, and in particular the Understanding on the Facilitator, can be implemented in a credible manner. Taking note of the assurances given by the Minister for Labour in his meeting of 14 November 2003 with the Liaison Officer, as well as those contained in the statement of the representative of the Government at the November 2003 session of the Governing Body, that the Government is firmly committed to the Joint Plan of Action and is ready to go ahead with its implementation, the Committee trusts that the Government will shortly take the necessary steps to restore a climate which will make it possible for the Plan of Action to be implemented in an effective and credible manner.
42. To summarize, in the last three years, the Government, at the highest levels, has given repeated assurances of its intention to put an end to the widespread violations of the Convention which had been noted by the Commission of Inquiry in its report. As noted in the Committee’s observation, a number of steps have been taken in this direction, in particular, orders have been issued to prohibit the use of forced labour. These orders have been translated into six ethnic languages and measures have been taken to make them known to public officials and the general public. A mechanism has been established to promote the observance of the orders and to disseminate awareness of them. An intensive dialogue has developed between the ILO and the authorities, which has resulted in the establishment of a presence in the country in the form of an ILO Liaison Officer.
43. The Committee is bound to observe that the three main recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry are still to be implemented. In spite of the Government’s assurances of its good intentions, the measures taken until now have not brought about significant progress in actual practice. Forced labour continues to be exacted in many parts of the country, mainly by the army. No person responsible for imposing forced labour has ever been prosecuted or sentenced under the relevant provision of the Penal Code.
44. In view of the slowness of the progress, it could be hoped that the process of dialogue and cooperation which has developed between the ILO and the Government can offer a real chance of bringing about more rapid and concrete results. The Committee considers that the Joint Plan of Action agreed in May 2003 offers an opportunity for the Government, with the technical assistance of the ILO and the financial support of the international community, to move from procedural steps to substantive progress and to dispel the doubts that the current reality may cast about the seriousness of its commitment. The Committee can only express the hope that the Government will do its utmost to ensure the continuation of this process of dialogue and cooperation and will take all the necessary steps in the very near future to make it possible for the Joint Plan of Action to be implemented.
45. The Committee reminds the Government that in any event the obligation under the Convention to suppress the use of all forms of forced or compulsory labour remains its responsibility.
[The Government is asked to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 92nd Session.]