Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2013, Publication: 102nd ILC session (2013)

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

A Government representative stated that his Government attached significant importance to the proper functioning of the ILO supervisory system and would continue to do so. While the Government had submitted an exhaustive report to the Committee of Experts, containing the requested documents and information it had not been duly taken into account. The Committee’s report stated that no action had yet been taken or reported on the measures to amend section 1117 of the Civil Code, to ensure equal family allowance and child benefit for men and women workers, and to review the Bill on early retirement of women. Contrary to the findings of the Committee, in order to give effect to the Convention, the Government had further strengthened its supervisory mechanisms, and in 2011 four technical bodies were established to amend the Labour Law, the Social Security Act, and the occupational safety and health regulations, and to promote social dialogue. The Government had provided the Committee of Experts with a full explanation on the above issues. In particular, the Government had submitted to Parliament several legislative amendments pertaining to female workers and was awaiting their final approval. In particular, the speaker referred to those ensuring equal pay for work of equal value for men and women workers, and prohibiting any type of discrimination based on the principles of the Convention; prohibiting termination of employment of female workers during the period of pregnancy and maternity (section 77 of the Labour Law); and prohibiting night work for women, except with respect to jobs exceptionally specified and authorized by the Tripartite Council on Technical Safety and Occupational Health.

Commenting on the Labour Law amendment, the speaker noted that the Council of Ministers had adopted a new bill incorporating, among other points, the views of the social partners. The proposed bill was submitted to Parliament on 22 October 2012. Prior to its final approval, the bill still could be subject to revision and amendment by the social partners who were constantly consulted by the parliamentarians on the matter. Commenting on the situation of social dialogue in the country, he indicated that contrary to the observation made by the Committee of Experts, the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work had received rather special attention of the Government and the legislature. As a result, the number of provisions concerning social dialogue in the new Labour Law had increased from 18 to 29. Section 131(4) of the Labour Law had been amended in close consultation with the social partners. The new amendment had duly provided for the establishment of free trade unions and their confederations at the enterprise, and/or industry levels. Referring to the concerns expressed by the Committee of Experts in respect of the absence of an appropriate legal framework for freedom of association and social dialogue, the Government categorically rejected any such assumptions and reiterated its strong adherence to the principles of social dialogue. The Government interacted with social partners not only out of obligation, but also due to the necessity to ensure sustainable development and social justice. Institutions such as the High Tripartite Labour Council, the High Tripartite Employment Council, the High Tripartite Council of Safety and Occupational Health were just a few examples of the numerous national frameworks that practiced social dialogue in an environment of freedom of association. In addition to the above national tripartite structures, workers’ and employers’ associations were also consulted on the establishment of the National Tripartite Committee on the Labour Law Amendment.

With regard to the situation of women workers, the observation of the Committee of Experts underestimated both the realities of the Iranian developing society and the Government initiatives for the promotion of the status of women in the world of work. He also reiterated the Government’s earlier statement to the effect that the Family Protection Bill had been officially approved by Parliament in 2011 and had entered into force. Regarding the early retirement of women Bill, he recalled that based on the Civil Service Early Retirement Act adopted in 2007, the Government was only authorized to practice the retirement scheme for official and contractual employees with at least 25 years of service by granting them a maximum of five years annual incentives. Contrary to the finding of the Committee of Experts, there was no coercion in this respect. The Bill did not impose any age condition and it was only enforced provided that the employees applied voluntarily, irrespective of their age and gender. Furthermore, the Family Allowance Amendment provided family allowance for both male and female workers (even for a couple working at the same workplace). As per section 86 of the Social Security Act, the salary and fringe benefits specified in the Labour Law were paid based on the work value and irrespective of the gender of the worker. Hence, a husband and wife working at the same enterprise were equally and indiscriminately entitled to housing, food, and family and child allowances. With regard to section 1117 of the Civil Code, the speaker reiterated that this provision had been officially superseded by the Family Protection Bill that granted equal rights to both spouses to prevent each other from taking up a job or profession that may adversely affect the dignity, integrity and the interests of the family. Any such decision by a spouse could be appealed in court, pursuant to the new Family Protection Law. Accordingly, section 1117 of the Civil Code had been irrevocably repealed.

Regarding the alleged denial of access to top management positions to women, there was no legislation or procedure that could either explicitly or implicitly encourage such practice. To the contrary, women’s role in administrative and legislative decision-making positions, as in the Parliament, the Council of Ministers and the judiciary, showed significant progress in terms of women’s access to higher managerial positions, both in the public and private sectors. Nowadays, women occupied the position of advisors and vice-advisors to the President, Parliament, etc. Many of them were also members of parliamentary standing committees, government decision-making committees, chief executives of the Central Bank, chaired various city councils, High Council of Cultural Revolution, High Council of Employment, High Council of Health and the High Council for Youth, were deputy ministers and headed public and private organizations. Furthermore, with regard to the alleged failure to address the issue of giving women access to all positions in the judiciary, including those qualified to hand down judgments, the speaker stressed that all female and male judges were equally paid and women enjoyed the same position in the penal courts, family courts and juvenile courts. As sitting judges, together with their male judge colleagues, they could also deliver equally binding judgments. The Government pledged to genuinely partner with the ILO and the Committee of Experts on technical cooperation and looked forward to furthering collaboration with a view to ensuring the application of international labour standards.

The Worker members stressed that the Islamic Republic of Iran was among the countries with the widest gender gap in the world. They recalled that in 2010 this Committee expressed its deep disappointment that firm promises made by the Government in 2006 to take all appropriate measures to bring its legislation and practice into line with the Convention had not been fulfilled. While noting that the Government had submitted a report on the implementation of the Convention in August 2011, the Worker members found the content of the report unsatisfactory. They shared the Committee of Expert’s deep regret regarding the lack of progress in revising the legal framework and pointed out that none of the legal revisions requested by the Conference Committee in 2010 and before, had been put in place. Legislation prohibiting discrimination in employment and education had still not been adopted, a National Committee to Monitor the Application of International Labour Standards was still identifying its goals, and section 1117 of the Civil Code, which provided that a husband could prevent his wife from taking up a job or profession, as well as the obligatory dress code, had still not been repealed.

While recognizing that the Government had adopted several measures which, at first glance, appeared to be promoting women’s employment, the Worker members considered that these measures seemed to be intended to promote the role of women as mothers and housewives, rather than to support female participation in the workforce. They stressed that the newly proposed legislation might in fact deteriorate access to employment and education for women, in particular for single women. They also deplored proposals that, although not accepted, were indicative of the restrictive atmosphere in which women sought employment, such as the obligation for single women below the age of 40 to require permission from a tutor or an Islamic lawyer to apply for a passport. Moreover, the recent restriction in the access of women to certain university courses could reverse the trend in women’s access to higher education and further limit their access to higher level employment and decision-making positions. The Worker members reiterated their concerns with respect to discrimination in social security regulations that may favour the husband over the wife in pension, child and other benefits. Many women worked in the informal economy, and women tended to be employed in lower paid, less secure jobs.

The Worker members further addressed the issue of discrimination against religious and ethnic minorities and stated in particular that the Baha’i were not permitted to hold governmental jobs, either in the civil service, in education or in the legal system. In the private sector, business licences were often denied or revoked, and Muslim employers were warned against hiring or retaining Baha’i employees. The Worker members recalled that the Committee of Experts also addressed the issue of discrimination on the basis of political opinion. The Islamic Republic of Iran ranked among the four countries with the highest number of journalists in prison and, contrary to the Government’s claims that trade unions could freely be established in the country, the painful experience of workers who tried was that of serious repression, including long periods of imprisonment. Restrictions on the right to organize and lack of trade union freedom and independence were hindering effective social dialogue that could address the issue of discrimination in employment and education.

The Employer members noted with regret that no concrete results had been achieved even though for many years, both the Committee of Experts and this Committee had been raising concerns regarding the laws and regulations that discriminated against women. While the Committee of Experts had noted in 2009 certain improvements in the areas of education, vocational training and employment of women, it remained concerned about the lack of evidence of real progress regarding the situation of women in the labour market. The Employer members stressed that despite the Family Protection Act, section 1117 of the Civil Code, which provided for the right of a husband to object to his wife’s profession, still had not been repealed or amended. While the Employer members welcomed the Government’s indication that the number of female judges had increased, the Committee of Experts observed that the Government had not addressed the issue of giving women access to all positions in the judiciary, including those qualified to hand down judgments, as no steps appeared to have been taken to address these limitations set out in the 1982 Law on the selection of judges and Decree No. 5080 of 1979. The Employer members noted the Government’s indication that both men and women were not hired after the age of 40, with a possible extension of five years. In this respect, they pointed out obstacles for women being employed after the age of 30, and were concerned about the lack of information regarding women in the labour market. They also raised concerns about the legislation imposing a dress code and the discrimination in social security provisions. All these legislative measures had a negative impact on the employment of women. The Employer members urged the Government to take concrete steps to ensure comprehensive protection against direct and indirect discrimination on all the grounds enumerated in the Convention.

The Worker member of Canada indicated that Iranian Gross Domestic Product (GDP) increased by 2.5 per cent annually and was expected to double in the next five years resulting in a 45 per cent inflation rate. This meant that married women needed more than ever to work to satisfy the needs of their families. However, according to the Government’s report concerning the implementation of the Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122), only 16 per cent of women participated in the labour market. Only 3.5 million Iranian women, compared to 24 million men, received a salary, were entitled to holidays, maternity leave and pension. There were many more women in the informal economy in a wide range of jobs where they represented from 50 to 90 per cent of the workforce. In addition, working women still had the primary obligation for domestic responsibilities. Women were trapped between two conflicting trends: with some pushing for law reform to remove employment restrictions for women, while others preferred that women stayed at home as provided for in the current Civil Code, which empowered men to bar their wives from taking up work. Despite the high literacy rate for both men and women (90 per cent), women were restricted to some areas of education and excluded from the core industrial and economic sectors. While 60 per cent of students in medicine, humanities, arts and science were women, only 20 to 30 per cent of the students in technical or agricultural studies were women. Almost 25 per cent of women and 43.8 per cent of young persons were unemployed. In its report in the framework of Convention No. 122, the Government had referred to a five-year development plan providing for a massive privatization scheme, the establishment of private employment agencies, and self-employment. This approach had already been adopted by other Asian countries in the 1980s, leading to a rampant development of young female sweatshops. In addition, women, even in family enterprises, earned one third of men’s salaries. The supervisory bodies had already referred to the growing number of forced marriages and the increase in trafficking of women and young girls. Discrimination was deeply rooted in Iranian textbooks where the dominant role of men at home and work was emphasized.

The Worker member of Turkey indicated that due to the existing discrimination on the grounds of political opinion, ethnicity and religion, young people, academics, politicians, human rights defenders and journalists were fleeing the country in order to escape imprisonment or even death. Many came to Turkey. There were more than 15 refugee camps in Turkey, six of which provided accommodation mainly to Iranians. More than 150,000 young Iranians were currently studying in Turkish universities and were afraid to return to their country. Public employees and others with a different political opinion, religion or origin from that of the national regime suffered from discrimination. This situation mainly affected women, both in law and in practice: the rate of employment of women was very low; they needed their husbands’ permission to work and travel; they had to observe a strict dress code; there were honour killings and the minimum age for marriage was set at 13. Women were discriminated in all sectors of education, and 14 fields of education were altogether forbidden to women. In contrast, men had the right to polygamy and the unilateral right to divorce. The speaker called on the Islamic Republic of Iran to comply with the Convention, and change its discriminatory legislation, taking into account the ILO’s guidance.

A representative of the European Union, speaking on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its Member States, as well as Croatia, Iceland, Montenegro, Serbia, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Norway and the Republic of Moldova, expressed deep concern at the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran, which continued to deteriorate. They called on the Iranian authorities to live up to the international human rights obligations that the Government had entered into. Alarmed by the severe discrimination against women and the pervasive gender inequality, they urged the Government to take concrete and immediate steps to ensure that laws and practices were fully in line with the Convention, including with a view to ensuring that women in temporary and contract employment benefited from all entitlements and facilities, and eliminating the discriminatory practices against women in recruitment and in job advertisements. Deploring the systematic discrimination against religious minorities, the speaker noted that the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran had reported that the Baha’i were subjected to severe socio-economic pressure and that in some cases they had been deprived of property, employment and education. They also deplored the reports of prosecution and persecution of teachers, students and trade unionists advocating for social justice, for equal rights, employment and for women’s rights. Recalling the recurrent lack of information during the discussions of this case, the Government was urged to cooperate fully with the supervisory bodies by providing the information requested on equality of opportunity and treatment between men and women, and the Government was invited to avail itself of ILO technical assistance.

The Worker member of France observed that with respect to discrimination based on political opinion, union membership and involvement in trade union or human rights activities, in particular, the Committee of Experts paints a disastrous picture of the prevailing situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran, which is the reason the case had been placed before the Committee this year. However, the reality was far worse. Discrimination in employment was systematically directed against independent trade unionists, journalists, human rights defenders, teachers, lawyers and those who criticize the Government, as well as against their family members. The Islamic Republic of Iran was second among the countries with the largest number of journalists in prison, most for having expressed views that differed from those of the Government. Mr Ahmad Zaidabadi, for example, had been sentenced to six years in prison and banned for life from practicing his profession. Lawyers were also imprisoned for defending human rights and were banned from practicing their profession. Such was the case of Ms Nasrin Sotoudeh who had been awarded the Sakharov prize in 2012 and yet had been sentenced to six years in prison and banned from practicing for ten years. Many other human rights defenders and critics and opponents of the Government were being persecuted, dismissed, imprisoned or tortured simply for exercising their right of expression. Membership of a trade union such as a teachers’ union, also brought the risk of prison, exile or some other form of punishment. All demonstrations by teachers, students and trade unionists calling for social justice or equal rights in education and employment were met with extreme violence. Many trade unionists, such as Mr Rasool Bodaqi and Mr Mahmood Baqeri, were currently serving time in prison due to the denial of freedom of expression. There was reason to fear that such information, horrific as it was, offered but a glimpse of the reality facing thousands of Iranian workers, human rights defenders and trade unionists.

The Government member of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela stated that his Government had taken note of the fact that the Committee of Experts had welcomed the increase in the number of female judges in the Iranian judiciary. The rise in equal opportunities and treatment for men and women in the workforce, the decrease in unemployment, measures designed to improve women’s access to training and education, and the ongoing efforts of the Government to promote women’s entrepreneurship had also been noted. He stated that there was legal protection to prevent gender-based discrimination. His Government considered that the Committee should take those efforts into account in its conclusions.

The Government member of Canada expressed her Government’s disappointment at the continuing discrimination against women, religious and ethnic minorities in employment and occupation in the Islamic Republic of Iran and the lack of measures taken by the Government to address these issues. Despite the strong and sustained urging of this Committee in the past to amend or repeal the legislation, employment laws and regulations discriminating against women were still in place. Section 1117 of the Civil Code, the social security regulations and obligatory dress code continued to prejudice women. Job advertisements were regularly discriminatory; women also faced unequal access to education and job training. Religious minorities faced persistent and pervasive discrimination. Members of the Baha’i faith were discriminated against in access to education, universities and occupations in the public sector; they had been deprived of property, employment and education. The legislative and policy frameworks in place to protect workers against discrimination and sexual harassment had not proved effective or adequate. It was not sufficient for these frameworks to exist; workers must be aware of their rights and be able to access credible and effective avenues for pursuing redress. The Government’s continued failure to respect its obligations under the Convention in the face of repeated calls for change by the Committee demonstrated a lack of seriousness and good faith. Her Government urged the Government to take concrete and decisive action to end discrimination against women and ethnic and religious minorities in employment and occupation and to promote women’s empowerment and women’s entrepreneurship. Only true progress in these areas would ensure respect for the human dignity of women and ethnic and religious minorities. The Government should engage with the ILO in good faith to secure technical assistance in order to bring its legislation and practice into line with the Convention and the recommendations of the Committee.

The Government member of Pakistan expressed appreciation for the Government’s comprehensive reply to the questions raised by the Committee of Experts. The Government had established technical groups to address amendments to the Labour Law and the Social Security Act, issues of occupational safety and health, and the promotion of social dialogue. There had also been some improvements, including the increase in the number of female judges and the efforts made regarding the new bill incorporating, among others, the views of the social partners. While expressing hope for the further strengthening of such measures and legislation, he emphasized that there was always room for improvement on the other unresolved issues. His Government therefore encouraged dialogue and appropriate resolution in this regard.

The Government member of India expressed his Government’s appreciation concerning the efforts made by the Government for the better application of the Convention, including that several measures had been taken to strengthen its supervisory mechanisms, by establishing four technical groups in the last two years to address amendments to the Labour Law and the Social Security Act. Furthermore, the Council of Ministers had succeeded in adopting a new bill incorporating, among others, the official points of view of the social partners, and currently a bill was under consideration in Parliament. Only dialogue and cooperation would help in resolving the outstanding issues, and his Government called on all member States to extend their cooperation to the Government for the full application of international labour standards.

The Government representative stated that some of the views and topics addressed in the discussion did not fall under the mandate of this Committee, and that comments of a political nature unrelated to the matters under discussion could jeopardize the legitimacy of the Committee. More than 70 per cent of university entrants were women, and that his Government was not aware of any legislation that either explicitly or implicitly encouraged discrimination against women in top management positions. Women’s role in administrative and decision-making positions, as in the Council of Ministers and the judiciary, on the contrary, had shown significant progress in terms of women’s access to higher managerial positions, both in the public and private sectors, including as advisers to the President. All female and male judges were equally paid, and female judges enjoyed the same calibre and position in the penal courts, family courts and juvenile courts. As sitting judges, female judges could also deliver judgments in the cases before the courts. Currently, out of the 8,002 judges, 614 were female and there had been an increase of 16.2 per cent in the number of female judges since 2009.

The speaker strongly refuted that discriminatory employment advertisements were an existing practice, as constructive steps had been taken to address this. As a result of social dialogue, the Iranian Confederation of Employers’ Associations had agreed to assist with defining the tasks with a view to the implementation of the Convention, which would address discriminatory recruitment processes in the private sector. Moreover, the Government had abided by the comments of the Committee of Experts to repeal the discriminatory legislation and regulations. Concrete steps had been taken to ensure the repeal or effective amendment of legislation, regulations and instructions to further promote women’s equality of opportunity and treatment in employment and occupation, including with respect to the amendment of section 1117 of the Civil Code and the Social Security Act. Regarding the early retirement of women, he indicated that this was voluntary and did not have a negative impact on women’s career paths, including access to higher level positions, or result in women receiving lower pensions. The Government did not allow for the promotion of discrimination, stereotypical attitudes or hatred against religious minorities. Despite false information in this regard, religious minorities were respected in the country. Religious minorities, including unrecognized religious minorities, were protected against discrimination and had equal access and opportunity to employment and education. In most provinces with religious or ethnic minorities, these groups had been assigned a proportional number of managerial positions in government, and the Government would provide information to the Committee of Experts on this subject on a regular basis to confirm its commitment in this regard. All measures taken to improve labour relations and conditions had been founded on a culture which favoured the promotion of social dialogue and the extension of social protection.

The Worker members stated that in spite of numerous examinations of this case, no real progress had been made to comply with the Convention. Furthermore, the information that had been provided was of a general nature and no substantive measures and targets had been indicated. The response of the Government to discredit the concerns and deny the problems raised by the social partners, added to the Worker members’ concerns. The lack of ability of the Government to repeal even the most patently discriminatory legislation and regulations was deeply regrettable. The new measures that were being proposed further restricted access to the labour market for women, instead of guaranteeing equal access to employment and education. Difficult access to information concerning discrimination in these areas hindered the discussions between workers and the Government. Moreover, the repression of independent trade unions was a major obstacle for assessing the situation on the ground and opening a process of social dialogue to address the issues at stake. The situation was so serious and the Government’s lack of cooperation so clear, that the Worker members found every reason to file a complaint on the basis of article 26 of the ILO Constitution, but had chosen not to do so this year. The Government therefore needed to take the issue seriously and take the necessary measures. While the Government’s acceptance of ILO technical assistance was to be noted, three conditions for such assistance were not met: (i) restrictions on trade union rights prevented meaningful social dialogue on the Convention; (ii) restricted access to independent information prevented a factual assessment of the situation; and (iii) technical assistance required clear and time-bound objectives and implementation plans in order to be effective. The Worker members proposed that a high-level mission visit the country, as soon as possible, before the forthcoming session of the Committee of Experts, based on a clear and wide mandate for fact-finding and for setting a time-bound action plan aimed at ensuring compliance with the Convention.

The Employer members expressed the hope that the information submitted by the Government concerning access of women to certain high-level positions, including judicial positions, and the statistical data regarding women’s participation in the labour market, would be provided to the Committee of Experts to allow this Committee to engage in more careful consideration. While measures were being taken, there remained significant barriers to women’s participation in the labour market, and discrimination against women in employment continued. This serious case had been considered before by both this Committee and the Committee of Experts. The tripartite partners had expressed concerns and the Committee of Experts had repeatedly urged the Government to take immediate action to ensure the full application of the Convention in both law and practice. The Employer members once again expressed regret regarding the lack of progress made in this regard, and expected that the issues relating to the employment of women would be addressed in the near future. In this respect, the repeal of section 1117 of the Civil Code was imperative. Moreover, legislation that restricted the role of female judges, imposed a dress code, restricted access to employment for women over 40 years of age and resulted in the discriminatory application of social security provisions was unacceptable. Recalling the long-standing issues concerning compliance with the Convention, the Employer members reiterated that they would be deeply disappointed if the measures taken or envisaged by the Government did not remove restrictions on women’s employment. It was now the moment to take proper and concrete action in this regard. Therefore, the Employer members expressed support for the Worker members’ request for a high-level mission.

Conclusions

The Committee took note of the oral information provided by the Government representative and the discussion that followed.

The Committee recalled that it had been raising concerns for a number of years including with respect to discrimination in law and practice against women, ethnic and religious minorities, and the absence of an environment conducive to social dialogue on the implementation of the Convention.

The Committee noted the Government’s indication that four technical groups had been established to address the amendment of the Labour Law, the Social Security Act and the Occupational Safety and Health By-laws, and the promotion of social dialogue, and that a number of amendments had been proposed. The Committee also noted the Government’s indication that more detailed information was provided in the report it had recently submitted for the Committee of Experts’ meeting in 2013.

The Committee expressed deep regret that no concrete results had been achieved since the Committee last examined this case in 2010. The Committee strongly urged the Government to move from promises to meaningful progress regarding the elimination of discrimination against women and ethnic and religious minorities. While welcoming the increase in women’s labour market participation and in the number of female judges indicated by the Government, the Committee noted that there remained significant barriers to women’s equality of opportunity in employment and occupation. The Committee also expressed continued and deep concern regarding the systematic discrimination against members of religious and ethnic minorities, and noted that discrimination against the Baha’i remained particularly serious.

The Committee urged the Government to take concrete and immediate action to end discrimination against women and ethnic and religious minorities in law and practice, to promote women’s empowerment and women’s entrepreneurship, to take decisive action to combat stereotypical attitudes underlying discriminatory practices, and to address sexual and other forms of harassment. It also urged the Government to ensure that any new measures would not further restrict access of women to the labour market and reinforce traditional roles and prejudices. Noting with deep concern discrimination in employment and education on the basis of political opinion, in particular with respect to journalists, teachers, students and trade unionists, the Committee urged the Government to take effective measures to ensure protection against discrimination on the basis of political opinion and respect for freedom of expression. It also regretted the continued absence of an environment conducive to freedom of association and social dialogue, and urged the Government to address this as a matter of urgency with a view to addressing the gaps in law and practice in the implementation of the Convention.

Emphasizing the seriousness of this case and the lack of progress, the Committee urged the Government to accept a High-level mission to examine all the points raised by the Committee of Experts and the present Committee concerning the application of the Convention. The Committee requested the Government to include in its report to the Committee of Experts due in 2013, complete information regarding all issues raised by this Committee and the Committee of Experts, for examination at its next meeting.

The Government representative considered that his Government had participated in the discussions of the Committee in a transparent and constructive manner. While his Government was fully prepared to clarify any further questions and to submit a detailed report to the Committee of Experts, he stated that the outcome of the discussions might have been different had this Committee taken into account the information recently submitted by his Government. His Government had always engaged in constructive discussions and submitted detailed information and welcomed that some of the social partners had highlighted some positive measures taken, as was duly reflected in the conclusions. However, it was regrettable that some of the improvements and reforms made by his country – which had been presented to this Committee – had not been adequately reflected by the Committee of Experts. Technical cooperation was the road to follow and his Government looked forward to engaging with the ILO in this regard. His Government would closely consider this Committee’s conclusions so as to address them in their entirety.