Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1996, Publication: 83rd ILC session (1996)

Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111) - Iran (Islamic Republic of) (Ratification: 1964)

The Government supplied the following information:

I. Paragraph 1 of the observation of the Committee of Experts refers to the detailed reports and statistics supplied by the Government, which is willing to continue its cooperation with the Committee of Experts and to supply further necessary information.

Paragraph 2 of the Committee's observation refers to various United Nations documents and resolutions. The Government draws the attention of the Committee to the following comment:

The ILO is the well-established specialized agency in the field of labour and also the ILO supervisory procedures are based on impartial principles. Therefore, the Government believes that, in the field of labour and employment, the ILO supervisory mechanisms should be the reference for other fora, and not vice versa. The politicization of the Commission on Human Rights is a fact that is admitted by the Commission itself.

Paragraph 3 of the observation has five subparagraphs which refer to the information that the Government has supplied, clearly demonstrating the extensive and detailed reporting which has also been substantiated by several official documents.

In reply to paragraph 4 of the observation, the Government would like to mention the following:

The circular issued by the Ministry of Labour in 1981 (by the officials in the Ministry at that time) had been a matter of disagreement and was found to be unconstitutional. The matter was taken up by the next administration in the Ministry of Labour with a view to correcting the situation to bring the text into full conformity with the Constitution. The 1989 directive of the Prime Minister emphasized that there should be no denial of the rights of citizens (citizens in general, without reference to any criteria) unless there is a ruling to this effect by the competent authority and according to the law.

This directive, issued by the Prime Minister, is the Government's official position, and emphasizes a general principle applicable to all citizens. The Government emphasizes that accusation cannot be a basis for the infringement of rights. The courts and the judiciary system are the only competent authority to judge such situations, based on relevant legally acceptable justification.

The following is a quotation from the Prime Minister's circular: "No one of the officials or employees of the Islamic Republic of Iran is allowed to deny the legal and social rights of any individual, for whom the allegations of espionage or denial of legal and social rights have not been proved by the competent authorities and have not been so condemned."

In order to give practical effect to the above-mentioned circular of the Prime Minister, the circular was addressed to all government ministries, organizations, institutions and foundations as well as provincial directorates. Consequently, the Minister of Labour and Social Affairs issued a directive which was circulated to all headquarters and provincial directorates and branches of the Ministry referring to the circular of the Prime Minister and thereby repealing and replacing the directive of 1981. Therefore, there is no restriction of access to labour courts and no discriminatory basis for withholding judgements in favour of any individual.

The text of the circular of the Prime Minister as well as the directive issued by the Ministry of Labour on that basis have been submitted to the Committee of Experts.

The Government also has previously informed the Committee of Experts on the possibility of appeal against unjust dismissal. Some relevant provisions are included in section 11 of the Administrative Justice Tribunal Code (a complaint against dismissal based on conviction, if any, can be filed under that section), and also relevant sections in the Labour Code, including provisions prohibiting any unjust dismissal, provisions for punishment of employers in the case of unjust dismissal, and provisions for reinstatement of dismissed workers.

The grounds for termination of the employment contract are specified in Chapter II, part III, of the Labour Code and Chapter IX is devoted to "settlement of disputes". These provisions do not recognize any basis for discrimination.

With respect to the request of the Committee of Experts mentioned in the latter part of paragraph 5, the Government would like to reiterate its commitment to Convention No. 111 and to its requirements to declare and pursue a national policy to promote equality of opportunity and treatment without discrimination on all grounds mentioned in the Convention. The Government would also welcome the opinion and technical assistance of the Department of Labour Standards in order to take any further steps to promote the objectives of the Convention. With regard to the followers of the Zoroastrian faith and Freemasons, the summary of the Government's reply is also given in the same paragraph. The Government would like to emphasize that any complaints are receivable.

With reference to paragraph 7 of the observation, the legal system in the Islamic Republic of Iran is based on the Islamic Code of Law. Judges should have the necessary qualifications according to this Code.

In referring to section 6 of the Labour Code, the Committee has quoted that "every person has the right to freely choose an occupation, provided that such occupation is not inconsistent with Islam, public interests and the rights of others". This section is clearly referring to the nature of the occupation and not the religion of the person. To give an example of the occupations which are inconsistent with Islam, the Government mentions the production and sale of alcoholic drinks, unauthorized sale of property of a third person and other examples. Therefore, these kinds of occupations are illegal. Section 6 itself is a legal provision for non-discrimination: the reference to "every person" is without restriction, and provides the right to freely choose an occupation. Similarly, in any country there are particular occupations which are considered illegal.

With reference to paragraph 8 of the observation, the Government would like to draw the attention of the Committee of Experts to the fact that the full name of the councils mentioned in that paragraph is "the Islamic Labour Councils". Nevertheless, members of the other religious minorities, as mentioned in the paragraph, can also be members of these councils.

Paragraphs 9 and 10 of the observation refer to United Nations documents. The Government has now eliminated grounds for the "particular concern" of the UN Committee, and the relevant information has been made available to it. (The Committee of Experts in paragraph 11 welcomed this information.)

With reference to paragraph 11 of the observation, the limitation on the number or quota for admission of women to study engineering, agriculture, mining or metallurgy which had been introduced previously is now completely repealed. The copy of the official document to this effect is submitted for the attention of the Committee of Experts. Thus, there is not any exclusion or limitation on admission to study any subject at university level. The statistics are being made available to the Committee, and show the trend after the total elimination of these quotas. The Government hopes these statistics will shed light on the progress in pursuit of a national policy to promote equality of opportunity in employment and occupation irrespective of sex.

The Committee has welcomed the bill amending the Act on Appointments to the Judiciary and has requested information on the passage of this bill. The Government would like to inform the Committee that the bill was discussed in Parliament and adopted; hence, it has become a law. Therefore, the law was published and was sent by the speaker of Parliament to the heads of the executive and judiciary branches of government for enactment.

The Government also requested comments from the judiciary in the preparation of this report. The reply from the judiciary in letter 15/87 dated 13 April 1996 states that "Article 20 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran provides that all individuals of the nation, whether women or men, are equally protected by the law and enjoy all human, political, economic, social and cultural rights according to Islamic principles. According to the law amending subparagraph 5 of the law annexing five subparagraphs to the law on the requirements for selection of judges adopted in 1984 by the Majlis shura Islami (Parliament of the Islamic Republic of Iran), the head of the judiciary can also recruit ladies holding the requirements for selection as judges. They hold judicial rank and undertake various judicial positions. Presently, up to 97 ladies are employed in various judicial positions all over the country, some of whom have been recruited in recent years."

The number of women lawyers and attorneys is about 250, which is 20 per cent of the total number of lawyers. Further statistics requested by the Committee are appended herewith.

In view of the aforementioned developments, there has been clear progress in eliminating of the causes of concern to the Committee. The Government hopes that these developments will bring about the satisfaction of the Committee of Experts.

With reference to paragraph 12 of the observation, the full text of Section 6 of the Labour Code is as follows:

"Section 6 - On the basis of articles 43(4), 2(6) and 19, 20 and 28 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran; forced labour and exploitation of others are prohibited; Iranians, whatever their tribe or ethnic group, enjoy equal rights and colour, race, language and the like do not constitute any privilege; all individuals, whether men or women, are equally under the protection of the law; and every person has the right to freely choose an occupation, provided that such occupation is not inconsistent with Islam, public interests and the rights of others."

Using the words "the like" right after colour, race and language in Section 6 of the Labour Code indicates that these are just examples, and the lawmakers did not intend to restrict the cases which are subject to Section 6. General references in this article to "Iranians", "whatever their tribal or ethnic group", "all individuals, whether men or women" and "every person" clearly manifests the intention of non-discrimination on any grounds whatsoever.

The first section of the Labour Code, which is devoted to definitions, is also quite clear that there can be no exceptions on any basis in the coverage of this Code. The text includes:

"1. All employers and workers, as well as workplaces and production, industrial, services and agricultural establishments are required to comply with the provisions of this Code" and

"5. All workers, employers, their representatives, trainees and workplaces are subject to the provisions of this Code".

The above-mentioned articles bear witness that the Labour Code adopted in 1991 is clearly in conformity with the non-discrimination principles of the Constitution and the Convention. Furthermore, the Labour Code of 1991 has also various merits which are worth mentioning. This code was drafted after a complete review of all the International Labour Conventions and Recommendations and also after extensive tripartite consultations. The new Labour Code incorporates higher labour standards than the previous code. It contains provisions on workers' and employers' organizations, a stricter ban on child labour, an extensive system of labour inspection, and inclusion of necessary provisions to guarantee the conformity of practice with the provisions of the code. Moreover, there are provisions on tripartism, employment security, and various other features of this Labour Code providing for sound, healthy and well-developed industrial relations and proper conditions of employment. There are extensive developments in the field of labour legislation. Progress achieved in this regard also deserves the attention of the distinguished Committee of Experts.

With regard to paragraph 13 of the observation, the Government will fully cooperate with the supervisory mechanism and supply comments, as well as the necessary information, including a reply to the direct request of the Committee of Experts.

In conclusion, the Government would like to recall that in recent years it has responded positively to the observations of the Committee of Experts by providing detailed and substantive reports. It has also undertaken to supply information and detailed statistics, as well as copies of relevant documents, thereby enabling the supervisory machinery to take them into account. The cooperative attitude of the Government was also manifested in the oral reply to the Conference Committee in 1993. The Government will continue this positive attitude and cooperation with the Committee of Experts and the supervisory mechanism of the ILO and report in detail to shed light on the real situation. The Government will also seek the advice and technical assistance of the ILO in improving the form and substance of its reporting obligations and in undertaking any other necessary action.

II. There has been continuous effort to promote participation of women in the labour market. Some of the steps taken include:

- an extensive campaign to raise awareness of the prominent role of women in development and civil society, and to bring this awareness to the forefront of public attention;

- creation of a department in charge of enhancing women's participation in the labour market. The Director General of this department is Madam Alafar, who has extensive experience in active labour market policies and also has experience working on an ILO project in this field;

- improvement of collection and processing of labour market information;

- various supports to self-employed women and small-business women entrepreneurs, as well as assistance to those intending to start their own businesses; these services include: marketing facilities through the provision of cost-free markets for direct sale of products; establishment of technical-service centres; establishment of training-production centres; support for small enterprises to prevent lay-offs; assistance in procurement of tools and equipment; extensive study on the potential areas of employment expansion and enterprise development;

- vast credit schemes with subsidized interest (practically negative interest) and requiring no asset guarantees against repayment;

- expansion of technical and vocational training for women;

- legal education intended to familiarize women workers with their rights, including job security and non-discrimination;

- expansion of employment services, vocational guidance and job placement services;

- increased welfare facilities for women workers;

- various assistance and support to the rural women workers and rural income-earning activities of women, including the expansion of rural production cooperatives;

- apart from programmes run by government agencies, there are also employment programmes specially targeted for women and implemented by welfare organizations;

- birth control aimed at reducing the growth rate of the population, thus enabling more women to enter the labour market. High fertility and high birth rates had been among the reasons for low labour market participation of women. The recent statistics illustrate the success of the family-planning campaign;

- government and non-governmental organizations have also carried out projects and joint activities related to women's issues with UNDP, UNICEF, FAO, UNFPA, UNESCO and UNHCR. An ILO/UNDP project has also addressed the employment of women;

- improvement of public health services offering increased health care and medical coverage;

- campaign against illiteracy among women resulting in a significant increase in the school enrolment of girls in all provinces;

- increased political awareness of women, as represented by activities of numerous women's NGOs and associations, female publications, increased numbers of women deputies in the parliament and an increase in the number of high-level government positions held by women (adviser to the President; deputy minister; ministerial advisers; directors-general; etc.);

- success in the campaign against unemployment in general has also been beneficial to women because higher rates of unemployment tend to further marginalize women entrants to the labour market.

In addition, a Government representative reaffirmed the Government's respect for the ILO supervisory machinery as well as its commitment to non-discrimination and to Convention No. 111. He informed the Committee of some new developments in the case. He noted that since 1993 the Government had engaged itself in a positive dialogue; had worked in the last few years in the Governing Body and the Working Group on Standards; and had cooperated with the United Nations Human Rights mechanisms, including inviting last year three special investigators on human rights to visit the country and study the situation. Concerning the 1981 directive of the Ministry of Labour, mentioned in the report of the Committee of Experts, he reiterated the written information provided to the Office, in particular that the directive had been repealed and that the relevant texts had been submitted to the ILO. However, the speaker welcomed the possible advice and technical assistance of the ILO, to take further steps to promote the objectives of the Convention.

With reference to paragraph 11 of the report of the Committee of Experts concerning the limitation on the number of women admitted to university to study various technical fields, he reiterated that, as was stated in the information supplied to the Office and mentioned that there had been an almost 294 per cent increase in the number of female students since 1977. Regarding gender discrimination in occupations, the Government had provided the Office with information on the number of women and men employed in 83 separate vocations, both in the public and private sectors. The speaker cited some of these statistics, including that since 1977 there had been a 260 per cent increase in the number of women employed in the public sector.

In relation to general measures concerning equality, mentioned in the report of the Committee of Experts, the speaker stated that the new Labour Code did not discriminate against any workers, employers, their representatives or trainees, as was mentioned in the written information submitted to the Office. Additionally, the rules and regulations concerning trades and cooperatives did not include any grounds for discrimination. And, as the Committee of Experts had acknowledged, Letter No. 10.35.12 dated 6 June 1990, signed by the Head of the Social Security Organization, showed there was no discrimination regarding pensions because any individual who fulfilled the general criteria of age and service would receive a retirement pension.

The speaker concluded by stating that apart from repealing several rules and regulations and providing detailed information and statistics, the Government was going to take an active approach to further promoting the objectives of the Convention and was going to see what else could be done to further promote equality of treatment. He again welcomed ILO technical assistance and informed the Committee that the Government had started consultations with the ILO in that regard.

The Workers' members stated that, upon reading the report of the Committee of Experts, they were disappointed because, after the change in the attitude of the Government in 1990 and 1993, they expected to see in the report some proof of a real change in legislation and practice concerning this Convention. The Committee of Experts had not seen such a change and, on the basis of the detailed information received, had concluded that discrimination based on religion and sex still existed, both specifically in labour and employment, and more generally, in the Islamic Republic of Iran. However, they welcomed once again the positive tone of the statement made by the Government and also the extensive written information provided.

The Workers' members commented on both the information communicated by the Government and the observations of the Committee of Experts. First, concerning the Baha'is, the Government had never admitted in its statements in 1990 and 1993 that the Baha'i had been discriminated against on the basis of religion, but it could be inferred and the Experts had always criticized this situation. The Government's position was quite different in the period from 1983 until 1990 when it had stated aggressively that the Baha'i were not at all a religious minority, and that they were excluded from certain activities because they were engaged in activities of espionage for foreign powers. The Employers' and the Workers' members from the Islamic Republic of Iran had supported the Government in saying that there was no place for the Baha'i in their country. This attitude seemed to have changed, but the Workers' members asked if the spirit which had inspired these statements was really dead and if the allegations and prosecutions for alleged espionage had changed by taking a few legal measures.

Second, the Workers' members referred to the Islamic Labour Councils. They considered that some functions of the Councils could deeply affect the position of Baha'i workers in labour and employment and were interested to know if these Councils had ceased to discriminate against the Baha'i and certain other religious groups and what had happened to the victims who had lost their jobs or who had been persecuted for alleged spying.

Third, as regarded discrimination against women, the Workers' members doubted that attitudes which had been practised for many years could be changed overnight. While they welcomed the Government's good intentions and changes in legislation and, hopefully, practice, they thought the scepticism of the Committee of Experts was justified and the questions put in the report were relevant, given the history of this case. They hoped that the statistics provided would enable the Committee of Experts to note progress in its next report on the issues raised.

The Workers' members hoped that the positive dialogue which had gone on for the last five years would continue. But they stated that good intentions were not enough because grave violations continued as the Government itself had acknowledged by its request for technical assistance. Having regard to the Committee of Experts' observation, the Workers' members thought that a renewed special paragraph mentioning Iran would be justified this year. The Workers' members suggested that a direct contacts mission would combine technical assistance with fact-finding regarding all of the questions raised by the Committee of Experts in its report and to interview the parties concerned, including representatives of the groups allegedly discriminated against. If the Government was ready to accept a direct contacts mission immediately the Workers' would refrain from proposing a special paragraph.

The Employers' members stated that since the mid-1980s the Committee had dealt with this case on at least nine occasions, the last being in 1993. They noted that the Government of Iran had been rather critical about the fact that documents from other UN organizations were included in the Committee of Experts' evaluation of the situation, but stated that as far as human rights were concerned, it was not just the ILO but many agencies of the United Nations organization which were competent and gave each other mutual support. So the evaluation of such documents was appropriate, particularly with regard to such an important question as discrimination.

The Employers' members noted that the Government had mentioned the existence of many documents which it had said would prove that there was no longer any discrimination. They awaited the results of a detailed examination of the documents concerning both the legislation and their effect in practice. They raised the specific question as to whether the concept of espionage, which had played such an important role in the past in cases of discrimination, had been eliminated from the legislative instruments once and for all, as that was an important basis of discrimination against members of certain political or religious groups, in particular the Baha'is, but also the Freemasons and Zoroastrians. In the reports of the UN Committee for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights there was still some concern about the violations of the rights of these individuals. Therefore it was important to know whether anything had changed, since neither the written information supplied to the Office nor the statement of the Government representative had contained a single word regarding these groups.

The Employers' members raised the question as to whether courts and the judiciary system continued to be connected with certain religious beliefs and whether certain religious groups were prevented from becoming judges. Likewise, with regard to the Islamic Labour Councils, they wondered whether members still had either to be practising Muslims or to belong to other specified religions.

Regarding equal rights for women and their access to studies and to many different occupations, the Employers' members noted that the Government representative had particularly emphasized that things had improved considerably and that conscious efforts were being made in order to give women an opportunity to take up certain activities and careers which had been closed to them in the past. They noted the information provided concerning women's access to the post of judge, but requested information on the access of women to the post of magistrate. They were interested in having the Committee of Experts examine the complete text of the new Labour Code and other relevant instruments concerning the elimination of discrimination.

They recalled that in the past discrepancies had existed between law and practice which lasted much too long and were much too wide-ranging and profound to be eliminated with a couple of decrees or regulations. Furthermore, the authorities in Iran had, in the past, quite actively argued against the rights of certain groups. Obviously there had to be a complete reversal of such a policy and they hoped the Government was ready to reverse the policy not only in law but in practice. They took note of the fact that the Government had twice asked for technical assistance from the ILO and had also stressed the need for cooperation in this area, and they suggested that a direct contacts mission to the country take place as quickly as possible. They requested that their concerns be expressed in the conclusions.

The Workers' member of Spain stated that he knew a little about Iran and he had thought that it was a case concerning discrimination in practice. But on closer examination, he had been surprised to observe that in Iran legal provisions existed which established distinct types of discrimination, and that discrimination was not only permitted but also that judges were obligated to uphold it. Lastly, he highlighted the gravity of this case and requested that Iran be mentioned in a special paragraph.

The Workers' member of Canada stated that this was not the first time this case had been discussed in the Committee and that the report of the Committee of Experts had concluded that evidently the Government did not have the political will to bring the practice into line with the provisions of the Convention. The report had identified two major aspects of discrimination, based on religion and sex. In the case of discrimination based on religion, it had been concluded that the situation had not improved, indicating that evidently this type of discrimination still existed, particularly concerning the Baha'is. The national policy was not in conformity with Article 2 of the Convention and in effect the Baha'is were not permitted to study at universities, nor to hold certain positions, and the Committee of Experts had requested that the circular of 25 February 1991 be repealed.

Concerning discrimination based on sex, it appeared that the situation had not improved. The inequality of social status made inequality of treatment and, above all, inequality in employment, inevitable. Consequently, it was impossible to reconcile the statement of the Government representative with the statistics evaluated by the Committee of Experts which had demonstrated that no progress was verified in implementing a policy of equality of opportunity in employment. During the 1993 Conference, this case had been discussed, at which time the Government had made the same statements which were made today, namely that the situation had been corrected and that the practice was in conformity with the Convention. But the detailed examination by the Committee of Experts showed that this was not the case. Lastly, he considered that Iran should be mentioned in a special paragraph, but he stated that, if the Government agreed, it would be useful to have a direct contacts mission to be able to obtain complete and verifiable information.

The Workers' member of Colombia stated that it was not comprehensible that, approaching the 21st century, they could be witnessing such high levels of discrimination. The deeply-rooted discrimination which existed in Iran based on religion and sex which affected students and thereafter people seeking employment, was unacceptable. He noted that to obtain a position in the civil service it was obligatory to be a practising Muslim, and women could not be employed in gas, petrol, electric or communications companies. The Government of Iran should make an effort to comply fully with the provisions of the Convention and to implement a policy of tolerance for all of its citizens, irrespective of religious beliefs. Lastly, he hoped that they would be able to observe progress concerning the questions raised, but he considered that the Committee should mention Iran in a special paragraph.

The Workers' member of the Islamic Republic of Iran stated that the report of the Committee of Experts had not dealt with the extensive problems of the Islamic Labour Councils but with less important aspects. Speaking as a member of an Islamic Labour Council, he expressed the hope that the Conference Committee would make the utmost effort to compel the Government and the employers to remove certain obstacles. He noted, in this regard, that, according to section 15 of the Islamic Labour Council Act, the formation of labour councils in large units was subject to the approval of Supreme Labour Councils. However, even though 12 years had elapsed since the promulgation of that legislation, large workers' units, such as the oil industry, some of the power stations and the steel industry, still did not have labour councils. Although, according to section 189 of the Labour Law, the courts had the power to punish employers who restricted the formation of labour councils, there had not been, up to the present time, any such noticeable punishment. He also stated that even though section 27 of the Islamic Labour Council Act prohibited the dismissal of members of the labour councils, there had been at least 20 members of labour councils who had been fired by their employers in different parts of Iran and support had not been given to those persons to enable them to return to their normal work. The labour councils also faced another problem in that the Boards of Directors of the relevant units did not invite them to attend their meetings, despite the fact that this was specified clearly by section 21 of the Act. During the year 1994-1995, workers in some units were threatened for holding their meetings. Particular obstacles were faced when labour councils were being formed in, for instance, the Pars Electric Co. and the Iran Khodrow Co. According to section 28 of the Act, and section 27 of the Labour Law, employers were obliged to inform the labour councils before dismissing workers, but unfortunately a large number of retrenchments had taken place without employers abiding by that requirement. In some cases, it had been noted that employers lodged undue and inappropriate complaints in the courts against the labour councils, as had been done by the Arin Yadak Company's management to prevent the labour council's activities. He concluded by hoping that the Committee would take due note of these matters and that it would attempt to compel the Government of Iran and the employers in the country to remove these discrepancies.

The Workers' member of Panama referred to the murder and imprisonment of trade union leaders, as well as to a protest letter from the World Federation of Labour denouncing the aggression and persecution against them. He considered that the Committee should strongly sanction the Government and that a special paragraph would be appropriate.

The Workers' member of Turkey first cited the provision of section 6 of the Labour Code of Iran and mentioned sections 75 to 78 of the Code and sections 899 to 902, 1122 to 1123, 1133 to 1134, 1169 and 1180 of the Civil Code of Iran, which he thought showed the mentality of discrimination against women. He thought that the prohibition or discouragement of women's wage employment in full freedom was driving them to undertake home work, which was an extreme exploitation of the workforce. He hoped that the Government would supply the text of legislation made under section 75 of the Labour Code concerning types of work prohibited for women and other relevant legislation. He finally supported the use of a special paragraph.

The Government member of Uruguay thought there was a contradiction between what was noted in paragraph 6 of the comment of the Committee of Experts and the statement in the written information that "with respect to the followers of the Zoroastrian faith and Freemasons, ... the Government would like to emphasize that all complaints are receivable". He emphasized that the Government should immediately ensure in practice that those people as well as any other group of citizens would enjoy equality in accordance with the Convention.

The Government representative felt that a constructive dialogue was being developed. Regarding the question of religious minorities, the Government intended to address individuals without taking into consideration their belonging to any minority or other group and to ensure that the same laws and regulations were applicable to everybody. The speaker had the impression that the Workers' members referred mainly to the situation that existed in 1983, that is, the past history of this case, while since 1993 the Government had consistently endeavoured to answer specific concerns in a positive manner. He emphasized that the Government was ready to continue a constructive dialogue with a positive attitude.

As to the question of a special paragraph, the Government representative considered it excessive in view of the contents and the tone of the report of the Committee of Experts, and the acknowledgement of the information contained therein.

Regarding the possibility of technical cooperation, the Government had already started preliminary contacts with the Office. This would be followed up so as to seek its advice and help in taking more practical steps. As to the reference to the possibility of a direct contacts mission, he considered it too early, not because there were too many problems but because it was necessary to see first the comments of the Committee of Experts on the recent reports of the Government.

Recalling the references made by the Workers' and Employers' members to UN documents, he explained that the Government wished to respond directly to the ILO observations instead of responding to UN observations in the ILO. Furthermore, there were other UN documents, for example the report of the special rapporteur on religious tolerance who visited the lslamic Republic of Iran only a few months ago. In its paragraph 43 on religious minorities, it was noted that no information referred to problems of access to universities for minority students or teachers. In paragraph 45, reference was made to discussions with minority representatives and to existing dialogue between them and the authorities. The report observed in paragraph 94 the apparently satisfactory situation of non-Muslim minorities. In paragraph 102, it was stated that the situation of Sunni Muslim minorities did not seem to give rise to problems of a religious nature. Paragraph 103 referred to a fairly satisfactory situation of the recognized Muslim and non-Muslim minorities. In addition, the United Nations special representative appointed to monitor human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran in his report of 1996, revealed in paragraphs 37 and 38 some information on the recruitment of women judges and referred in paragraph 51 to women members of the Independent Bar Association.

The Government representative agreed with the Workers' and Employers' members that the Committee of Experts had to study in detail the information and the statistics that had been supplied. He also agreed with the Employers' members in saying that it was a question of deeds and not of words. The speaker thought that references were made in some other interventions to laws and regulations that left him puzzled. He denied the allegations that some universities did not accept female students or Christians or Jews. He further denied the allegation that all persons working in the public sector had to be Muslim and that women could not be employed in gas, oil or telecommunications sectors. He hoped that the Committee of Experts would study all these issues.

Referring to the statements by the Workers' members of Canada and Turkey concerning the situation of women, he thought that the statistics supplied clearly showed the improvement in the situation and that the written information listed in its second part various practical steps taken to encourage the participation of women in the labour force. Regarding types of work prohibited for women under section 75 of the Labour Code, which had been raised previously in the Committee, he mentioned the example of work involving the handling of heavy weights which he thought was in conformity with international labour standards.

The Government representative thought that some interventions included allegations of a more political nature, which were not true and which were irrelevant to the dialogue concerning Convention No. 111. He stressed the Government's serious attitude and genuine willingness to move forward together with the Committee, with the help of the Office, in a transparent way, and assured that reports would be supplied to the Office for examination by the Committee of Experts and this Committee.

The Workers' members thanked the Government representative for his response. Recalling their earlier statement that the Committee of Experts had not seen proof of a real change in law and practice, they cited the following parts of the Experts' comments: paragraph 3, "the Committee notes from the above- mentioned UN documents that the situation of the Baha'i has not improved ..."; paragraph 4, "The Committee also expresses its concern at the lack of progress concerning repeal of the discriminatory provisions in the above-mentioned 1989 Directive No. M/11/4462..."; paragraph 5, which quoted the UN Committee's conclusion expressing concern about violation of the rights of the Baha'i community; and paragraph 8 asking the Government to reconsider the 1985 Act on Islamic Labour Councils so as to bring it into conformity with the Convention. On several other points the Committee of Experts noted information provided by the Government but still requested further clarification. The Workers' members requested the Government representative to point out references to real changes in case they had missed them in the Experts' report. As to the criticism by the Government representative that there was too much concentration on past history, the Workers' members stressed that they wished to see real changes as a result of the recent positive attitude of the Government which they welcomed.

Regarding the questions of a special paragraph, they recalled that in the past this case had been noted in a special paragraph on five occasions and as a continued failure to implement three times: seven years had passed since the last special paragraph and the Conference Committee had given the Government time to correct the shortcomings. The Workers' members considered a direct contacts mission would be beneficial since such a mission was not a punishment but a positive indstrument which could satisfy the request of the Government, provide technical assistance and, at the same time, make a study of the situation on the spot. They requested the Government to reconsider their reaction in this regard. If the Government would accept such a mission, the Workers' members would agree to drop the special paragraph and wait until next year for further examination of the situation.

The Employers' members requested the Government representative to state whether there had been any new provisions or information concerning Baha'is. They noted that there was a political will for cooperation but that something more was needed. While in the provision of technical assistance the ILO usually played a rather passive role, a direct contacts mission, where the ILO can play an active part in the wide ranging set of problems, would be the appropriate tool to help make progress. They requested the Government to give careful consideration to this question.

The Government representative stated, in reply to the Workers' members, that the Directive No. M/11/4462 had been submitted to the Committee of Experts. Regarding Islamic Labour Councils, there were discussions about revision of the regulations. He also referred to documents of the Labour Court and other bodies, which could be consulted by the ILO. As to the question of Baha'is, he reiterated that the more recent laws and regulations were referring to individuals and not to groups of people. It was explicitly stated in the Directive of the Prime Minister that allegations of espionage could not be the basis of any action, which could be initiated only by competent bodies. As regards the real progress, he thought that the statistics and other information supplied was its proof.

The Government representative did not deny the usefulness of a direct contacts mission but he was not in a position to commit himself on behalf of the Government. He stressed that the Government did not reject any possibility of a direct contacts mission but could not decide to accept it in a day or even a week's time. The speaker also reiterated the commitment of the Government to take further practical steps with the assistance of the Office and to keep the Committee informed.

The Government representative stated the Government would do its best to supply the information requested by this Committee. He considered that given the oral and written information already provided by the Government, a special paragraph was excessive.

The Committee took note of the report of the Committee of Experts and also of the detailed oral and written information provided by the Government representative. The Committee would await with interest the assessment which the Committee of Experts would make of this information. The Committee expressed the hope that the Government would provide additional and complete information to the Committee of Experts, to make it possible to assess whether the members of the Baha'i community and members of other religious communities did enjoy equality of treatment in practice. The Committee also urged the Government to provide complete and comprehensive information concerning the adoption of a national policy to promote equality without discrimination based on religion, particularly with regard to posts within the judiciary system, election to Islamic Labour Councils and access to university education. The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the results in practice of such a policy. The Committee noted with interest the elimination of restrictions concerning women's access to university studies and requested the Government to provide the Committee with additional information concerning the practical implications of this measure. Generally speaking, the Committee once again expressed its concern with regard to the lack of equality for women in society and at work. The Committee expressed the hope that the Government in the very near future would provide its comments on the observations made by the World Confederation of Labour on 4 December 1995, and that substantial and specific progress could be noted in the very near future. The Committee noted that the Government was ready to accept technical assistance from the International Labour Office. Since the Committee had been discussing the situation in this country for many years now, the Committee had proposed that the Government invite a direct contacts mission to visit the country. The Committee was obliged to note that the Government was not in a position to commit itself in this regard. Under these circumstances, the Committee decided to have these conclusions appear in a special paragraph of its General report.

The Government representative stated the Government would do its best to supply the information requested by this Committee. He considered that given the oral and written information already provided by the Government, a special paragraph was excessive.

The Committee took note of this statement.