Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Bulgaria (Ratification: 1999)

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, which read as follows:

1. The Committee requests the Government to supply copies of any provisions governing labour discipline in merchant shipping. The Committee would also appreciate it if the Government would provide copies of any provisions governing the press and other media.

2. Compulsory prison labour

The Committee has noted the Government’s reference in its report to sections 24(1) and 64 of the Execution of Punishment Act, which stipulate that prisoners have the right to be given suitable work, which should be assigned by the prison administration in accordance with the existing possibilities and taking into account the prisoners’ age, sex, state of health, working capacity and their rehabilitation needs. The Government indicates that work is not an obligation but a right of prisoners. The Committee notes, however, that section 38(a) of the Act expressly provides for an obligation of prisoners to perform work assigned to them by the prison administration, and section 76 of the same Act imposes disciplinary sanctions for the non-performance of the obligation to work or other obligations by the prisoners. The Committee further notes that section 66(1) of the Execution of Punishment Rules also provides for the obligation of all able-bodied prisoners to work. It therefore appears from the above legislative provisions that all convicted prisoners are obliged to perform prison labour.

The Committee refers to the explanations provided in paragraphs 102-109 of its General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour, where it indicated that the exceptions to the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), and specifically the exclusion of prison labour, do not automatically apply to the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105), which was designed to supplement the 1930 Convention. As indicated by the Committee in paragraph 105 of its General Survey of 1979, in most cases, labour imposed on persons as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law will have no relevance to the application of the abolition of forced labour Convention, but if a person is in any way forced to work because he holds or has expressed particular political views, has committed a breach of labour discipline or has participated in a strike, the situation is covered by the Convention.

3. Article 1(a) of the Convention. Political coercion and punishment for holding or expressing views opposed to the established system. The Committee previously noted that, under the Penal Code, sanctions of imprisonment (which involve compulsory prison labour under the abovementioned provisions) may be imposed inter alia for the propagation of “anti‑democratic ideology” (section 108(1)), for arousing dissension on religious grounds by speech, press, action or otherwise (section 164), for using religion and church in a propaganda against authorities, by speech, press, action or otherwise (section 166), and for conducting a public assembly, meeting or manifestation, in violation of legislation (section 174a(2)). Recalling 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, the Committee reiterates its hope that the Government will provide, in its next report, information on the application of the above penal provisions in practice, including copies of the court decisions defining or illustrating their scope, as well as information on measures taken or envisaged to ensure conformity with the Convention in this regard.

4. Article 1(c). Sanctions involving compulsory labour for breaches of labour discipline. The Committee previously noted the provisions of the Penal Code, under which sanctions of imprisonment (which involve compulsory prison labour) may be imposed for a negligent performance by an official of his duties causing substantial harm or damages to the enterprise (section 219(1) and (2)) and for issuing poor quality, non-standard or incomplete products (section 228(1)). The Committee recalled that Article 1(c) of the Convention prohibits the use of compulsory labour as a means of labour discipline. Noting the Government’s statement in its report that the non-performance of work obligations may constitute a crime under the Penal Code and may result in imposing a penal liability in the conditions prescribed by the law, the Committee requests the Government to describe such conditions and to provide information on the application of the above penal provisions in practice, supplying copies of the court decisions defining or illustrating their scope and indicating measures taken or envisaged to ensure compliance with the Convention on this point.

5. Article 1(c) and (d). Sanctions involving compulsory labour for breaches of labour discipline and for participation in strikes. The Committee previously noted that, under section 107 of the Penal Code, creating difficulties or disorder in the functioning of industry, transport, agriculture or other branches of the economy or individual enterprises, by obstructing their normal work or by non-performing regular duties, is punishable by imprisonment for a term of up to ten years, and in the most serious cases – up to 15 years (which involves compulsory prison labour). The Committee has noted the Government’s explanations concerning the interpretation of this section, which, according to the Government, is only applicable in the case of sabotage. However, referring also to its comments on Convention No. 87 concerning restrictions on the right to strike in certain sectors, the Committee again requests the Government to provide information on the application of section 107 in practice, supplying copies of the court decisions defining or illustrating its scope, in order to enable the Committee to ascertain whether sanctions provided for in this section are not used as a punishment for breaches of labour discipline and for having participated in strikes.