Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Bangladesh (Ratification: 1972)

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving the obligation to work as a punishment for the expression of political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. 1. Penal Code. The Committee previously requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of section 124A of the Penal Code, which provides that whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the Government established by law shall be punished with imprisonment for life or any shorter term, to which a fine may be added, or with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which a fine may be added, or with a fine. According to section 53 of the Penal Code, rigorous imprisonment and imprisonment for life involve compulsory hard labour, while simple imprisonment does not involve an obligation to work.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the Penal Code does not interfere in employer–worker relations, and is applied to impose penalties on violence, incitement to violence or engagement in acts aimed at violence. Referring to paragraph 263 of the 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, the Committee reminds the Government that the purpose of the Convention is to ensure that no form of forced or compulsory labour is used in the circumstances specified in the Convention, which are closely interlinked with civil liberties, not limited to employer–worker relations. The Committee recalls that the Convention does not prohibit punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence, incite to violence or engage in preparatory acts aimed at violence. But sanctions involving compulsory labour fall within the scope of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of peaceful expression of views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system, whether such prohibition is imposed by law or by a discretionary administrative decision. In this connection, the Committee observes that, referring to incitement to contempt or disaffection towards the Government, section 124A of the Penal Code is worded in terms broad enough to lend itself to application as a means of punishment for the expression of views, and in so far as it is enforceable with sanctions involving compulsory labour, it falls within the scope of the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that no penalties involving compulsory labour may be imposed for the peaceful expression of political views, or views opposed to the established system, for example by clearly restricting the scope of section 124A of the Penal Code to situations connected with the use of violence or incitement to violence, or by repealing sanctions involving compulsory labour. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in this respect, as well as information on the application of this section in practice, including any prosecutions conducted or court decisions handed down, indicating the penalties imposed.

2. Information and Communication Technology Act. The Committee notes that, section 57 of the Information and Communication Technology Act of 2006 (ICT) criminalizes several forms of online expression, including defamation, expressions tarnishing the image of the state or an individual and statements hurting religious sentiments, among others. As amended in 2013, the offences under this section are punishable by imprisonment of seven–14 years. The Committee also notes that, in its concluding observations of 27 April 2017, the UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) expresses its concern at the arrest of at least 35 journalists, “secular bloggers” and human rights defenders in 2016 under the ICT Act of 2006 (amended in 2013), a de facto blasphemy law that limits freedom of opinion and expression using vague and overbroad terminology to criminalize publishing information online, that “hurts religious sentiment” and information that prejudices “the image of the State” with a punishment of seven to 14 years (CCPR/C/BGD/CO/1, paragraph 27). The Committee further notes that, pursuant to section 46(3) of the Prison Act of 1894, any inmate who violates prison rules may be punished by hard labour for a period not exceeding seven days, even if he/she has not been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment, which involves an obligation to work. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that no punishment involving compulsory labour is imposed in practice on persons who, without having recourse to violence, express political opinions or views opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It also requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in this regard.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.