Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) - Bulgaria (Ratification: 1932)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

The Committee notes the observations of the Confederation of Independent Trade Unions in Bulgaria (CITUB) communicated with the Government’s report. The Committee notes that in its observations, the CITUB encourages the Government to speed up the procedure for the ratification of the Protocol of 2014 to the Forced Labour Convention, 1930.

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. Trafficking in persons. 1. Law enforcement. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 159(a), (b) and (c) of the Criminal Code criminalizes internal and external trafficking in persons for both sexual and labour exploitation, as well as the use of services of trafficking victims, and establishes penalties of two to 15 years of imprisonment and a fine. It also noted the revision and adoption of the National Mechanism for Referral of and Support to the Victims of Human trafficking. Noting that in the majority of cases related to trafficking in persons the sanctions that had been imposed were suspended imprisonment and a fine, the Committee requested the Government to provide information in relation to the identification of victims and law enforcement measures.

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report on the data from the prosecutor’s office concerning the criminal proceedings for trafficking in persons under sections 159a–159d of the Criminal Code. According to this data, in 2020, 356 proceedings were initiated, including 76 newly filed cases and 73 penal sanctions were imposed on 46 convicted persons, with imprisonment (13), fines (27), and suspended sentences (31) and others (2). Similarly, during the first quarter of 2021, 176 proceedings were initiated, including 16 newly filed cases, and 17 penal sanctions were imposed on 13 convicted persons, with imprisonment (5), fines (4) and suspended sentences (8). The Government indicates that the fine is imposed cumulatively with imprisonment. The Committee also notes that in 2020, 458 victims of trafficking were identified under sections 159(a) to (d), including 397 women and 26 minors.

The Government further refers to certain difficulties that are generally encountered before and during the trial, such as : (i) the identification of victims, especially in relation to international trafficking; (ii) the relationship between the victim and the perpetrator which prevents the timely reporting of the crime and also the reluctance of the victims to cooperate with the investigation and to testify; and (iii) the change in the testimony of the victims due to fear, threats, or promises made by traffickers. In most cases, victims of trafficking for forced labour are not identified as victims of a criminal activity and the labour inspectors rather than referring the cases to the prosecutor’s office close the case by imposing a pecuniary sanction. According to the information provided by the Government, out of the 279 cases of trafficking in persons received by the National Commission for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings (NCCTHB) from 2017 to 2020, 50 cases concerned trafficking for labour exploitation. The Committee requests the Government to continue to take measures to address the difficulties encountered in relation to the identification and prosecution of cases of trafficking in persons, including through: (i) providing appropriate training to officials of the Labour Inspectorate; (ii) strengthening their capacities to better identify victims of trafficking for forced labour and gather evidence for the prosecution of the perpetrators; and (iii) by strengthening protection and counselling to victims and witnesses during the investigation and court proceedings. Furthermore, noting that a significant number of the penalties imposed are suspended sentences of imprisonment, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that sufficiently effective and dissuasive penalties are applied to perpetrators, in conformity with Article 25 of the Convention. The Committee finally requests the Government to continue providing information on the application in practice of section 159(a), (b) and (c) of the Criminal Code, including on the number of prosecutions, convictions and penalties applied.

2. National Strategy for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings. The Committee welcomes the Government’s information concerning the adoption of the National Strategy for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings 2017–2021, which sets out national priorities including: active prevention with a focus on vulnerable groups; increased identification, protection, assistance and support for victims; effective prosecution and punishment of the crime of trafficking in human beings; enhanced inter-ministerial and international coordination and cooperation. This strategy is implemented through annual national programmes developed and implemented by the NCCTHB. The Government indicates that every year, the NCCTHB conducts training sessions for investigators, magistrates, social workers, labour intermediaries, diplomats, migration authorities, refugee agencies and pedagogues on good practices on preventing trafficking in persons, improving methods of investigation and effective prosecution and punishment and protection of victims. In addition, the NCCTHB organizes three national campaigns at the national level for the prevention of trafficking in persons for sexual and labour exploitation and on new forms and trends in the trafficking in persons. The Committee also notes the detailed information provided on the various forums, workshops, campaigns, lectures and information sessions carried out from 2017 to 2021 under the national campaign organized by the NCCTHB which were addressed to different sections of the population. The 2020 and 2021 national campaigns, having taking into account the COVID-19 pandemic situation that led to an increased risk of being trafficked for labour exploitation, have focussed on initiatives that aim to raise awareness and sensitivity of the public and vulnerable groups on ways to prevent risky situations and ensure safe labour migration. The Committee encourages the Government to continue its efforts to combat trafficking in persons, including through the implementation of the priorities set out in the National Strategy for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings 2017-2021 and through the actions carried out by the NCCTHB. It requests the Government to communicate information on the measures taken in this regard as well as the monitoring and assessment of these measures by the NCCTHB, as provided for under the Strategy.

3. Protection and reintegration of victims. The Committee notes the Government’s information on the amendments to the Combating Trafficking of Human Beings Act (CTHBA), which introduces a clear definition of the period for unconditional support for victims of trafficking with a clear regulation of its functions and duration as well as the possibility to open specialized shelters for the subsequent reintegration of victims of human trafficking. The Government indicates that pursuant to these amendments, the NCCTHB has initiated specialized services for victims of trafficking, and runs shelters for temporary accommodation as well as support centres and shelters for subsequent reintegration. Victims and potential victims of trafficking are provided accommodation and specialised services according to their needs, which include, humanitarian, psychological, social and medical assistance, as well as legal counselling. In 2019, the NCCTHB established a total of five state-funded services, including two shelters for temporary accommodation, two centres for protection and assistance and one shelter for accommodation and subsequent reintegration.. The Committee further notes the detailed information provided by the Government concerning the number of identified victims of trafficking who have received support in the state-funded services from 2018 to April 2021. The Committee strongly encourages the Government to continue taking effective measures to ensure that victims of trafficking are provided with appropriate protection and services, and requests it to continue to provide information on the assistance provided and the number of persons benefiting from it.

Article 2(2)(c). Prison labour. The Committee previously noted that, under section 96(1) of the Execution of Penal Sanctions and Detention in Custody Act 2009 (EPSDCA), persons deprived of their liberty shall be obliged to perform the work assigned to them by the prison administration, non-compliance with this obligation being punishable with disciplinary sanctions under sections 100(2) and 101 of the Act. Pursuant to section 174(1) of the Act, prisoners may work on sites of legal and natural persons under conditions and procedures established by the Minister of Justice. Furthermore, according to section 164 of the Rules Implementing the Execution of Penal Sanctions and Detention in Custody Act 2010 (as amended up to 2017) (Implementing Rules), prisoners shall file an application for the jobs opened in the State Enterprise “Prison Work Fund” and in the servicing and utility activity of the prisons. The Government indicated that, in practice, prisoners are not forced to work, their work is regulated by the labour legislation and the work on external sites is always performed at the wish of the persons concerned, who shall file applications to the chief of the respective prison. The Committee, however, noted that according to section 167(1) of the Implementing Rules, all prisoners, who are capable of working, shall be obliged to perform the work assigned to them by the administration. Moreover, under section 163, the express written consent for participation in labour activities is only explicitly required for the accused and the defendants, not for all prisoners, in particular, the convicts. The Committee therefore encouraged the Government to take the necessary measures to align its national legislation with the indicated practice.

The Committee notes the Government’s information that the obligation of the prison administration to ensure proper work to persons deprived of their liberty is covered under section 77 of the EPSCDA, which states that during the service of the sentence, persons deprived of their liberty shall have the right to suitable work. As far as possible, the preference of the person deprived of his/her liberty for a particular kind of work shall be satisfied. The Government further states that it is in the process of preparing draft amendments to the EPSDCA and its Implementing Rules which will clarify the provisions of sections 163 and 167(1) of the Implementing Rules. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the Government will take the necessary measures, during the preparation of the draft amendments, to ensure that the Rules Implementing the Execution of Penalties and Detention in Custody Act are amended so as to provide that any work or service performed by convicted prisoners for private undertakings is carried out voluntarily with their formal freely given and informed consent. It requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in this regard.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. Trafficking in persons. The Committee previously noted that section 159(a), (b) and (c) of the Criminal Code criminalizes trafficking in persons for both sexual and labour exploitation, as well as the use of services of trafficking victims. The Criminal Code also establishes penalties of two to 15 years of imprisonment and a fine. The Committee noted that coordination of the efforts of relevant actors was ensured through the National Commission for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings, seven local commissions and a national mechanism for referral and support of trafficked persons.

The Committee notes the Government’s information in its report that an initial draft of proposals for amendments to the Combating Trafficking in Human Beings Act and the implementing rules to the Act was developed regarding the “reflection and recovery period” and its time frame. The National Mechanism for Referral of and Support to the Victims of Human Trafficking was revised and adopted by the Council of Ministers in July 2016. The Committee also notes the copy of a court decision of 2015 attached to the Government’s report, under which one defendant was found guilty and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment pursuant to section 159(a) and (b) of the Criminal Code. The Committee further notes that the National Programme for Preventing and Combating Trafficking in Human Beings and Protection of Victims 2016 was adopted. Various measures have been taken within its framework, including institutional and organizational measures, legislative measures, awareness-raising activities, training for officials and other actors, as well as international cooperation. Particularly, several consultation meetings were held for the preparation of the National Strategy for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings 2017–21.

The Committee further notes the report published on 28 January 2015 by the Group of Experts on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (GRETA), concerning the application by Bulgaria of the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (GRETA(2015)32). According to it, there were 491 victims identified in 2014 and 309 victims in the first half of 2015, of which about 86 per cent were female. The majority of the victims (77 per cent) were trafficked for the purpose of sexual exploitation, while trafficking for the purpose of forced labour accounted for 12 per cent of the victims (paragraph 16). The GRETA report also indicates that, since 2014, no data has been collected by the Supreme Cassation Prosecutor’s Office as regards the length of punishments imposed by final convictions and judgments. According to the available data, in the majority of cases the punishment that has been imposed for trafficking has been suspended imprisonment and a fine (paragraph 199). The Committee finally notes that, in its concluding observations of December 2017, the Committee against Torture of the United Nations expressed its concern at the gaps between legislation and strategies and their implementation (CAT/C/BGR/CO/6, paragraph 27). While noting the efforts made by the Government, the Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on the application in practice of section 159(a), (b) and (c) of the Criminal Code, including on the number of convictions and specific penalties applied, as well as on the difficulties encountered by the competent authorities in the identification of victims and legal proceedings. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on any progress made regarding the adoption of draft amendments to the Combating Trafficking in Human Beings Act and the implementing rules to the Act, as well as the National Strategy for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings 2017–21, and provide a copy once adopted.

Article 2(2)(c). Prison labour. The Committee previously noted that, under section 96(1) of the Execution of Penal Sanctions and Detention in Custody Act 2009, persons deprived of their liberty shall be obliged to perform the work assigned to them by the prison administration, the non-compliance with this obligation being punishable with disciplinary sanctions under sections 100(2)(1 and 9) and 101 of the Act. Pursuant to section 174(1) of the Act, prisoners may work on sites of legal and natural persons under conditions and procedures established by the Minister of Justice. The Committee therefore observed that prisoners are obliged to perform prison labour under the menace of a penalty and that this work may be carried out for private entities.

The Committee notes the Government’s information on the legislative changes in this regard. According to section 164 of the Rules Implementing the Execution of Penal Sanctions and Detention in Custody Act 2010 (as amended up to 2017, referred to as the Implementing Rules hereafter), prisoners shall file an application for the jobs opened in the State Enterprise “Prison Work Fund” and in the servicing and utility activity of the prisons. Moreover, the inclusion of prisoners in labour activity shall be carried out after their capacity to work is established and on the basis of an evaluation of their state of health and professional qualification, their interests and preferences, the evaluation of the risk and the requirement of the regime and security. The Government indicates that the work on external sites is always performed at the wish of the persons concerned, who shall file applications to the chief of the respective prison. The Committee also notes the copies of applications filed by prisoners, submitted by the Government with its report, as well as Ministerial Orders regarding the work of prisoners outside the prison premises. The Committee further notes several provisions regarding the working conditions of prisoners. Section 169(1) of the Implementing Rules 2010 provides that all rules on health and safety at work, applicable to employees, shall also apply to prisoners. The duration of the working day and week, as well as the minimum daily and weekly rest shall be determined in accordance with the labour legislation, pursuant to section 172(1). Furthermore, working prisoners shall receive a remuneration of 40–50 per cent of the national minimum wage depending on the position occupied, as provided for by Ministerial Order No. ΠC 04-89 of 25 January 2011.

While taking due note of the Government’s indication that in practice prisoners are not forced to work and that the work conditions are regulated by the labour legislation in principle, the Committee notes, however, that section 167(1) of the Implementing Rules provides that all prisoners, who are capable of working, shall be obliged to perform the work assigned to them by the administration. Moreover, under section 163, the express written consent for participation in labour activities is only explicitly required for the accused and the defendants, not for all prisoners, in particular, the convicts. The Committee therefore encourages the Government to take the necessary measures to align its national legislation with the indicated practice by amending sections 163 and 167(1) of the Rules Implementing the Execution of Penalties and Detention in Custody Act, so as to provide that any work or service performed by prisoners for private undertakings is carried out voluntarily with their formal freely given and informed consent. It also requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in this regard.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. Trafficking in persons. The Committee notes that sections 159(a) to 159(c) of the Criminal Code criminalize trafficking in persons for both sexual and labour exploitation regardless of the consent of trafficking victims, as well as the use of services of trafficking victims. The Criminal Code establishes penalties of two to 15 years of imprisonment and a fine. Increased penalties are provided for under section 159(a)(1) and (2), inter alia, when trafficking in persons has been committed through the use of force or by misleading, or through making use of a status of dependency. The Committee further notes the report published on 14 December 2011 by the Group of Experts on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (GRETA), concerning the application by Bulgaria of the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings. The Committee observes that coordination of the efforts of relevant actors is ensured through the National Commission for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings (NCCTHB), seven local commissions and a national mechanism for referral and support of trafficked persons. In this regard, the Committee takes note of the 2011 National Programme for Prevention and Counteraction of Trafficking in Human Beings and Protection of the Victims which focuses on local policies and efforts for combating trafficking in persons and on prevention among adolescents, their parents and teachers and ethnic minorities, with a view to combating trafficking in human beings for the purpose of labour and sexual exploitation, as well as child trafficking. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of sections 159(a) to 159(c) of the Criminal Code, including on the number of convictions and specific penalties applied, as well as on the difficulties encountered by the competent authorities in identifying victims and initiating legal proceedings. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the implementation of the National Programme for Prevention and Counteraction of Trafficking in Human Beings and Protection of the Victims, indicating whether the objectives set out have been achieved and whether an evaluation has been undertaken in order to assess the impact of the measures adopted.

Article 2(2)(c). Prison labour. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, under section 96(1) of the Implementation of Penal Sanctions and Detention in Custody Act, 2009, persons deprived of their liberty shall be obliged to perform the work assigned to them by the prison administration, the non-compliance with this obligation being punishable with disciplinary sanctions under sections 100(2)(1 and 9) and 101 of the Act. Pursuant to section 174(1) of the Act, prisoners may work on sites of legal and natural persons under conditions and procedures established by the Minister of Justice. While noting that prisoners have the right to be given suitable work, in accordance with section 77(1) of the Act, the Committee observed that prisoners are obliged to perform prison labour under the menace of a penalty and that this work may be carried out for private entities.

The Committee notes the Government’s repeated indications in its report that work of prisoners both inside and outside prison premises is voluntary and always requires that their intention should be duly expressed in writing. The Government adds that prisoners have to file a request to the prison director, the correctional institution or the prison boarding house, who may issue a written order to authorize the prisoner to work after his or her ability to work has been established. Then, the committee, provided for under section 35 of the Rules and Regulations on the Implementation of the Execution of Penalties and Detention in Custody Act, may decide to allocate the prisoner to a worksite. The Committee notes the additional information provided by the Government on the working conditions of prisoners. The Committee also notes the comments made by the Confederation of Independent Trade Unions in Bulgaria (CITUB) communicated with the Government’s report which considers that the clarifications provided by the Government are comprehensive.

While noting the Government’s indication that in practice prisoners cannot be forced to work even if they have incentives to do so, the Committee notes that no provision of the Implementation of Penal Sanctions and Detention in Custody Act, 2009, requires the prior formal and informed consent for the work of prisoners for private companies, both inside and outside prison premises. The Committee recalls that, according to Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention, work by prisoners for private entities can be held compatible with the Convention only where the necessary safeguards exist to ensure that the prisoners concerned accept such work voluntarily, without being subjected to pressure or the menace of any penalty, and that the conditions of such work approximate those of a free labour relationship. Considering that, according to the Government, in practice, prisoners cannot be forced to work for private companies but should express in writing their intention to do so, the Committee requests the Government to align its national legislation with its national practice in order to incorporate into its legislation the necessary safeguards to ensure that the work of prisoners for private companies, both inside and outside prison premises, is always carried out with the formal, informed and freely given consent of the person concerned. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress made in this regard, as well as copies of requests for work filed by prisoners. Please also provide a copy of the Rules and Regulations on the Implementation of the Execution of Penalties and Detention in Custody Act, and of Order No. LS-04-241/25.02.2010 and Order No. LS-04-89/25.01.2011, both issued by the Minister of Justice.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention. Work of prisoners for private companies. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to certain provisions of the Implementation of Penal Sanctions Act (now repealed and replaced by the new Implementation of Penal Sanctions and Detention in Custody Act, 2009), which allowed prisoners to work for private companies and other legal entities, under the conditions provided for by the Minister of Justice. The Committee recalled that, to be compatible with Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention, which expressly prohibits convicted prisoners from being hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations, such work should be carried out voluntarily and in conditions approximating a free employment relationship; this necessarily requires the formal and informed consent of the persons concerned, as well as conditions of work approximating a free labour relationship (see General Survey on the eradication of forced labour, 2007, paragraphs 54–61 and 98–122).

The Committee noted the Government’s repeated indications in its reports that performing labour is a right of prisoners, and that the work of prisoners both inside and outside prison premises is voluntary. However, the Committee noted that, under the old Implementation of Penal Sanctions Act, prisoners were obliged to perform work assigned to them by the prison administration, and the non performance of the obligation to work was punishable with disciplinary sanctions (sections 38(a) and 76 of the Act and section 66(1) of the Implementation of Penal Sanctions Rules). The Committee also noted that the obligation to work was also provided for in section 10(1) and (2) of Ordinance No. 5 of the Ministry of Justice, of 21 March 2006, on the conditions and procedures relating to work performed by incarcerated persons. The Government indicated in its previous report that the provisions of the Implementation of Penal Sanctions Act referred to above would be amended and that the voluntary nature of prison labour would be introduced in the forthcoming amendments to the Act.

The Committee notes that, under section 174(1) of the new Implementation of Penal Sanctions and Detention in Custody Act, 2009, prisoners may work on sites of legal and natural persons under conditions and procedures established by the Minister of Justice. It notes in this connection a model contract between the state enterprise “Prison Work Fund” and a private company concerning the use of prison labour, annexed to the Government’s report. The Committee also notes that, under section 96(1) of the Act, persons deprived of their liberty shall be obliged to perform the work assigned to them by the prison administration, the non-compliance with this obligation being punishable with disciplinary sanctions under sections 100(2)(1 and 5) and 101 of the Act. It therefore appears from the above legislative provisions of the new Act that convicted prisoners are obliged to perform prison labour under the menace of a penalty, even if they have the right to be given suitable work, in accordance with section 77(1) of the Act. Though prisoners’ conditions of work shall be determined by the labour legislation (section 175(2) of the Act) and therefore may be considered as approximating those of a free labour relationship, the Committee observes that, under the legislation in force, the free, formal, informed consent of prisoners to work for private enterprises does not appear to be asked for.

While noting the Government’s repeated indication that, in practice, prisoners are not obliged to work and that they are only motivated to carry out work which is aimed at their rehabilitation, the Committee hopes that measures will be taken to amend the provisions of the Implementation of Penal Sanctions and Detention in Custody Act, 2009, referred to above, with a view to ensuring that freely given, formal and informed consent is required for the work of prisoners for private companies, both inside and outside prison premises, so as to bring legislation into full conformity with the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the progress made in this regard.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

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 matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention. Work of prisoners for private individuals, companies or associations. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 61 of the Execution of Punishments Act, which allows prisoners to work for trading companies, other legal entities and individual proprietorships, under the conditions provided for by the Minister of Justice. It recalled that, to be compatible with Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention, which expressly prohibits convicted prisoners from being hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations, such work should be carried out voluntarily and in conditions approximating a free employment relationship; this necessarily requires the formal and informed consent of the persons concerned, as well as further guarantees and safeguards covering the essential elements of a free labour relationship, such as wages and social security, etc. (see paragraphs 54–61 and
98–122 of the Committee’s General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour).

The Committee noted that section 38(a) of the Execution of Punishment Act and section 66(1) of the Execution of Punishment Rules provide for an obligation of prisoners to perform work assigned to them by the prison administration, and section 76 of the Act imposes disciplinary sanctions for the non-performance of the obligation to work or other obligations by the prisoners. The Committee notes that the obligation to work enforceable with the disciplinary sanctions is also provided for in section 10(1) and (2) of Ordinance No. 5 of the Ministry of Justice, of 21 March 2006, on the conditions and procedures relating to work performed by incarcerated persons, which was supplied by the Government with its previous report. It therefore appears from the above legislative provisions that, as a general rule, convicted prisoners are obliged to perform prison labour, even if they have the right to be given suitable work, in accordance with sections 24(1) and 64 of the Execution of Punishment Act.

The Committee has noted the Government’s repeated indications in its reports that performing labour is a right of prisoners, and that the work of prisoners both inside and outside prison premises is voluntary. The Government also indicates that, in practice, disciplinary sanctions for refusal to work in prisons are not applied. The Committee has noted the Government’s statement in its 2006 report that section 38(a) of the Execution of Punishment Act referred to above is going to be amended and that the principle of voluntary nature of prison labour will be introduced in the forthcoming amendments of the Execution of Punishment Act.

The Committee requests the Government to communicate a copy of amendments to the Execution of Punishment Act, as soon as they are adopted. It also requests the Government to supply a copy of a Model Agreement concluded by the State Enterprise “Prison Work Fund” and a private company concerning the use of prison labour, which was referred to by the Government as attached to its report, but has not been received in the Office.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

The Committee has noted the Government’s reply to its earlier comments. It has noted, in particular, the detailed information on the application in practice of the Law on combating trafficking in human beings of 20 May 2003, as well as the information on the various measures taken by the Government in accordance with the National Programme to Combat Trafficking in Human Beings.

Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention. Work of prisoners for private individuals, companies or associations. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 61 of the Execution of Punishments Act, which allows prisoners to work for trading companies, other legal entities and individual proprietorships, under the conditions provided for by the Minister of Justice. It recalled that, to be compatible with Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention, which expressly prohibits convicted prisoners from being hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations, such work should be carried out voluntarily and in conditions approximating a free employment relationship; this necessarily requires the formal and informed consent of the persons concerned, as well as further guarantees and safeguards covering the essential elements of a free labour relationship, such as wages and social security, etc. (see paragraphs 54–61 and 98–122 of the Committee’s General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour).

The Committee noted that section 38(a) of the Execution of Punishment Act and section 66(1) of the Execution of Punishment Rules provide for an obligation of prisoners to perform work assigned to them by the prison administration, and section 76 of the Act imposes disciplinary sanctions for the non-performance of the obligation to work or other obligations by the prisoners. The Committee notes that the obligation to work enforceable with the disciplinary sanctions is also provided for in section 10(1) and (2) of Ordinance No. 5 of the Ministry of Justice, of 21 March 2006, on the conditions and procedures relating to work performed by incarcerated persons, which was supplied by the Government with its previous report. It therefore appears from the above legislative provisions that, as a general rule, convicted prisoners are obliged to perform prison labour, even if they have the right to be given suitable work, in accordance with sections 24(1) and 64 of the Execution of Punishment Act.

The Committee has noted the Government’s repeated indications in its reports that performing labour is a right of prisoners, and that the work of prisoners both inside and outside prison premises is voluntary. The Government also indicates that, in practice, disciplinary sanctions for refusal to work in prisons are not applied. The Committee has noted with interest the Government’s statement in its 2006 report that section 38(a) of the Execution of Punishment Act referred to above is going to be amended and that the principle of voluntary nature of prison labour will be introduced in the forthcoming amendments of the Execution of Punishment Act.

The Committee requests the Government to communicate a copy of amendments to the Execution of Punishment Act, as soon as they are adopted. It also requests the Government to supply a copy of a Model Agreement concluded by the State Enterprise “Prison Work Fund” and a private company concerning the use of prison labour, which was referred to by the Government as attached to its report, but has not been received in the ILO.

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

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:

Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention. Work of prisoners for private employers. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 61 of the Execution of Punishments Act, which allows prisoners to work for trading companies, other legal entities and individual proprietorships, under the conditions provided for by the Minister of Justice. It recalled that, to be compatible with Article 2, paragraph 2(c), of the Convention, which expressly prohibits convicted prisoners from being hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations, such work should be carried out in conditions approximating a free employment relationship; this necessarily requires the formal consent of the persons concerned, as well as further guarantees and safeguards covering the essential elements of a free labour relationship, such as wages and social security, etc. (see paragraphs 119 and 128 to 143 of the Committee’s General Report to the 89th Session of the International Labour Conference, 2001).

The Committee has noted the Government’s repeated statement in its reports that performing labour is a right of prisoners, but it is not deemed obligatory. The Government refers in this connection 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 the work of prisoners both inside and outside prison premises is voluntary, and their work for private companies is only possible if they give their explicit consent in writing and if occupational safety and health requirements are ensured by the employer.

The Committee notes, however, that section 38(a) of the Execution of Punishment 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, as a general rule, convicted prisoners are obliged to perform prison labour, even if they have the right to be given suitable work, in accordance with sections 24(1) and 64 of the Execution of Punishment Act.

The Committee therefore again requests the Government to indicate, as regards the abovementioned section 61 of the Execution of Punishment Act, how the voluntary consent of the prisoners to work for private employers is guaranteed, so that it is free from the menace of any penalty, including any loss of privileges or other disadvantages following from a refusal to work, and to supply copies of relevant provisions. Please also communicate a copy of Ordinance No. LS-03-416 (1991) of the Minister of Justice concerning prisoners’ remuneration, referred to by the Government in its report, as well as copies of any other texts issued by the Ministry of Justice concerning the conditions under which prisoners may work for private employers, to which reference is made in section 61(1) of the Execution of Punishment Act. The Committee would appreciate it if the Government would also supply a sample copy of an agreement concluded by the administration of a penitentiary institution and a private company concerning the use of prison labour, as referred to in the Government’s report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

The Committee has noted the Government’s reply to its earlier comments. Referring to its 2000 general observation concerning measures to combat trafficking in human beings, it has noted with interest the adoption of the Law against the illegal trafficking in human beings of 20 May 2003, as well as the information on the practical measures taken by the Government in this field. The Committee has also noted the Government’s reply to the comments made by the Confederation of the Independent Trade Unions of Bulgaria concerning the application of section 120 of the Labour Code.

Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention. Work of prisoners for private employers. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 61 of the Execution of Punishments Act, which allows prisoners to work for trading companies, other legal entities and individual proprietorships, under the conditions provided for by the Minister of Justice. It recalled that, to be compatible with Article 2, paragraph 2(c), of the Convention, which expressly prohibits convicted prisoners from being hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations, such work should be carried out in conditions approximating a free employment relationship; this necessarily requires the formal consent of the persons concerned, as well as further guarantees and safeguards covering the essential elements of a free labour relationship, such as wages and social security, etc. (see paragraphs 119 and 128 to 143 of the Committee’s General Report to the 89th Session of the International Labour Conference, 2001).

The Committee has noted the Government’s repeated statement in its reports that performing labour is a right of prisoners, but it is not deemed obligatory. The Government refers in this connection 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 the work of prisoners both inside and outside prison premises is voluntary, and their work for private companies is only possible if they give their explicit consent in writing and if occupational safety and health requirements are ensured by the employer.

The Committee notes, however, that section 38(a) of the Execution of Punishment 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, as a general rule, convicted prisoners are obliged to perform prison labour, even if they have the right to be given suitable work, in accordance with sections 24(1) and 64 of the Execution of Punishment Act.

The Committee therefore again requests the Government to indicate, as regards the abovementioned section 61 of the Execution of Punishment Act, how the voluntary consent of the prisoners to work for private employers is guaranteed, so that it is free from the menace of any penalty, including any loss of privileges or other disadvantages following from a refusal to work, and to supply copies of relevant provisions. Please also communicate a copy of Ordinance No. LS-03-416 (1991) of the Minister of Justice concerning prisoners’ remuneration, referred to by the Government in its report, as well as copies of any other texts issued by the Ministry of Justice concerning the conditions under which prisoners may work for private employers, to which reference is made in section 61(1) of the Execution of Punishment Act. The Committee would appreciate it if the Government would also supply a sample copy of an agreement concluded by the administration of a penitentiary institution and a private company concerning the use of prison labour, as referred to in the Government’s report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

1. The Committee has noted the Government’s reply to its earlier comments. It has also noted the information supplied by the Government in reply to its 2000 general observation concerning measures to combat trafficking in human beings, and in particular, the elaboration of the draft Law against the illegal trafficking in human beings. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide a copy of this Law, as soon as it is adopted.

Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention. The Committee previously noted that section 61 of the Law on the Execution of Punishments allows prisoners to work for trading companies, other legal entities and individual proprietorships, under the conditions provided for by the Minister of Justice. In its latest report, the Government expresses the view that work exacted from prisoners in the course of detention must not be considered as forced or compulsory labour.

The Committee recalls in this connection that, under Article 2, paragraph 2(c), of the Convention, work or service exacted from any person as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law is excluded from the scope of the Convention if two conditions are met, namely:

… that the said work or service is carried out under the supervision and control of a public authority; and that the said person is not hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations.

The Committee has always made it clear that the two conditions are cumulative and apply independently; i.e. the fact that the prisoner remains at all times under the supervision and control of a public authority does not in itself dispense the Government from fulfilling the second condition, namely that the person is not hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations (see paragraph 119 of the Committee’s General Report to the 89th Session of the International Labour Conference, 2001). As the Committee repeatedly pointed out, it is only when work or service is performed in conditions approximating a free employment relationship that work by prisoners for private companies can be held compatible with the explicit prohibition of the Convention; this necessarily requires the formal consent of the persons concerned, as well as further guarantees and safeguards covering the essential elements of a free labour relationship, such as wages and social security, etc. (ibid., paragraphs 128-143).

The Committee previously noted the Government’s statement in its report that performing labour is a right of prisoners, but it is not deemed obligatory. However, in its latest report the Government refers to the "existing element of obligation". The Committee requests the Government to clarify the situation, indicating clearly whether the work of prisoners is compulsory or not and supplying copies of relevant provisions, and more particularly, as regards the abovementioned section 61, how the voluntary consent of the prisoners to work for private employers is guaranteed, so that it is free from the menace of any penalty, including any loss of privileges or other disadvantages following from a refusal to work.

In the light of the above considerations, the Committee again requests the Government to describe the conditions in which work of prisoners for private employers takes place, including payment of normal wages, social security and observance of occupational safety and health legislation (e.g. through labour inspection), and indicate how those conditions are determined. Please supply copies of complete texts of the Law on the Execution of Punishments (together with the regulations on its application) and the Juvenile Delinquency Act, 1958, as amended. Please also communicate copies of any other texts issued by the Ministry of Justice concerning the conditions under which prisoners may work for private parties, to which reference is made in section 61(1) of the Law on the Execution of Punishments.

2. The Committee has noted the comments by the Confederation of the Independent Trade Unions of Bulgaria, transmitted by the Government with its report, alleging violations in the implementation of section 120 of the Labour Code (as amended in 1992) concerning a temporary transfer of a worker without his/her consent to another post in the same or another enterprise for a period of up to 45 calendar days during a year, with a possibility to assign a worker a job of a different nature without taking account of the worker’s qualifications, such a transfer being enforceable with disciplinary sanctions, including dismissal. The Committee requests the Government to refer to these allegations in its next report and to supply any available information on the application of section 120 in practice, describing the circumstances of such transfers, with particular emphasis on the conditions of work before and after a transfer has been carried out, and indicating sanctions imposed on workers in case of refusal.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee notes the Government’s reply to its earlier comments. It notes, in particular, the adoption of the Alternative Military Service Act, of 6 November 1998.

Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention.  The Committee notes that section 61 of the Serving Punishments Act allows prisoners to work for trading companies, other legal entities and individual proprietorships, under the conditions provided for by the Minister of Justice. The Government states in its report that performing labour is a right of prisoners, but it is not deemed obligatory. The Committee requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, the provisions in the national laws or regulations showing that the work of prisoners is not compulsory, and more particularly, as regards the abovementioned section 61, how the voluntary consent of the prisoners to work for private parties is guaranteed, so that it is free from the menace of any penalty, including any loss of privileges or other disadvantages following from a refusal to work.

The Committee also notes section 62 and requests that the Government also describe the conditions in which work of prisoners for private employers takes place, including payment of normal wages, social security and observance of occupational safety and health legislation (e.g. through labour inspection), and indicate how those conditions are determined. Please supply copies of complete texts of the Serving Punishments Act (together with the regulations on its application) and the Juvenile Delinquency Act, 1958, as amended. Please also communicate copies of any other texts issued by the Ministry of Justice concerning the conditions under which prisoners may work for private parties, to which reference is made in section 61(1) of the Serving Punishments Act.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

1. Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention. Referring to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest from the Government's report that, according to section 128(a) of the Defence and Armed Forces Act (as amended in State Gazette No. 122 of 1997), a career military service contract can, after an initial minimum duration of three years for the first contract, be terminated by written notice of six months. The Committee further notes that the National Assembly is considering an Act to replace compulsory military service with alternative service at the request of the person concerned. The Committee asks the Government to communicate the text of that Act when it has been adopted.

2. Article 2(2)(c). The Committee asks the Government to provide information concerning any obligation to work imposed on inmates of reform schools for juveniles, and to communicate any laws, rules or regulations applying to those institutions, particularly as regards the work of inmates.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

With reference to its observation, the Committee asks the Government to provide, in its next report, additional information on the following points:

1. The Committee notes the provision of section 128(2) of the Law on the Defence and Armed Forces, according to which career servicemen who concluded a contract on career military service under section 112 of this Law (i.e. former conscripts who are entitled to conclude such a contract during the first 12 months of their compulsory service) are excluded from the application of section 128(1) of the Law, which provides for a possibility for career servicemen to leave the service at their own request:

The Committee would appreciate it if the Government would specify the conditions of leaving the service at their own request for this category of career servicemen, either at certain reasonable intervals or by means of notice of reasonable length, and supply copies of relevant provisions.

2. Please also indicate whether a possibility to undergo an alternative service instead of compulsory military service, provided for in section 84 of the above-mentioned Law, may be used only at the request of a person concerned.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the adoption on 13 December 1995 of the Law on the Defence and Armed Forces, which entered into force on 27 February 1996. It notes with satisfaction that section 128(1) of the Law, concerning the conditions for termination of the service of career members of the armed forces, provides for their right to leave the service at their own request by giving six months' notice. It also notes with satisfaction that section 111(1) of the above-mentioned Law provides for the limitation of compulsory military service to work of a purely military character. The Committee is raising certain questions in this connection in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

The Committee notes with interest the information supplied by the Government in its report in reply to earlier comments. It notes that the Government will report on the enactment of the Armed Forces Bill as soon as it is voted by Parliament. Recalling the Government's indication in its report received in 1992 that the Bill will take into account all comments made by the Committee under the Convention, the Committee hopes that the new legislation will ensure:

1. the limitation of compulsory military service to work of a purely military character so that enrolment in units such as the Construction Corps will be reserved to volunteers; and

2. the right of all career members of the armed forces, including officers and non-commissioned officers, to leave the service in time of peace on their own initiative after a reasonable period of service, by giving notice or at specified intervals. The Committee looks forward to communication of the provisions adopted to this end.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

1. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the provisions respecting the special labour services, and in particular the building brigades covered by section 3 of the Universal Military Service Act of 1958 and Decree No. 100 of 1954, under which young persons may be called upon to perform their military service for two years in the special labour services. The Committee also noted that by virtue of Decree No. 100 the construction forces carry out economic, constructional and other tasks and that activities are organized for the ideological formation and education of the conscripts.

The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the duration of training, the nature of activities performed, and the proportion of young people receiving vocational training.

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report as well as the text of the provisions appended.

The Committee notes that according to the Government young people are selected for conscription in the construction corps at the preliminary examination of their fitness for service. The vast majority has received an occupational training before being called up. Those who have not received previous training are, after recruitment and basic military service, enrolled at their request in an occupational training course, at the end of which they undergo a period of work experience and take an examination.

The Government adds that on the strength of the training thus received all young people are assigned to building brigades and perform a definite work suiting their qualifications.

The Committee takes due note of this information. The Committee recalls that under the Convention only work of a purely military nature falls outside the scope of the Convention. A definite work in a building brigade has not such character.

Noting the Government's statement in its report that an Armed Forces Bill is being drafted which considers the future of the construction corps, the Committee hopes that the necessary measures will be taken to ensure that conscripts can only be called upon to perform work or services of a purely military nature, in conformity with Article 2, paragraph 2(a) of the Convention except in the case of an emergency (force majeure).

2. Referring to its previous comments the Committee notes that Decree No. 1253 of 30 June 1989 respecting civil mobilization in peacetime was repealed by an Act adopted on 18 December 1989 repealing some statutory provisions adopted between May and November 1989 (published in the Official Gazette, No. 99 of 22 December 1989).

The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the provisions at present governing civil mobilization and a copy of the applicable text.

3. The Committee notes that under section 18 of the universal military service Law, 1958 (as modified), the text of which was provided by the Government, officers and non-commissioned officers may resign after 25 years of service. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on measures taken or envisaged to preserve the right of this category of personnel in the service of the State to leave the service on their own initiative after a reasonable period, either at specified intervals or by giving notice.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

1. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the provisions respecting the special labour services, and in particular the building brigades covered by section 3 of the Universal Military Service Act of 1958 and Decree No. 100 of 1954, under which young persons may be called upon to perform their military service for two years in the special labour services. The Committee noted the Government's indications that young persons receive, within this framework, a civilian vocational training corresponding to civilian qualifications and that they may, when beginning their service, declare their preferences concerning the trades that they wish to master. The Committee requested the Government to supply copies of any texts concerning the principle of choice of training in the building brigades by young persons called upon to perform their compulsory military service, including a copy of the instruction referred to by the Government, and to supply information on the work carried out by young persons who have not obtained a vocational diploma.

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report that young persons have a choice between a wide range of types of training and may express their preference at the stage of the medical examination for fitness for service; those who are assigned to the construction forces may, at their request, be assigned to training schools. Young persons who do not manage to obtain a vocational diploma receive a certificate of participation in the training courses and they may, after finishing their service in the construction forces, enrole in a vocational education centre. The Committee also examined the documents supplied by the Government, namely Decree No. 100 of 1954, as amended and the Regulations for the Educational Units/Schools of the Construction Corps engaged in training builders, fitters and technicians (the title page and page 4 of these Regulations).

The Committee notes that it is indicated on page 4 of the Regulations that the selection of students is made during their individual training on the grounds of their interests and previous experience, and that the schools are replenished according to the list of young persons selected. The Committee also notes that by virtue of Decree No. 100 the construction forces carry out economic, constructional and other tasks and that activities are organised for the ideological formation and the education of the conscripts. The Committee understands, on the basis of these texts, that only a part of the young persons recruited into these forces are selected to receive training. The Committee recalls that the Convention provides that, leaving aside the general exception respecting cases of emergency, compulsory military service is exempted from the scope of the Convention only for work of a purely military character and that restrictions on the freedom protected by the Convention are accepted only to the extent required by necessities such as fighting calamities or the exigencies of national defence. The Committee also refers to paragraphs 147 and 149 of its 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour in which it noted the clarification which the Conference deliberations on the Special Youth Schemes Recommendation, 1970 (No. 136), have provided concerning the relationship between the forced labour Convention and certain compulsory schemes for young persons.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate the duration of training and to specify whether it covers the whole of the two years spent in the construction forces. It also requests the Government to supply statistics on the number of young persons selected to receive vocational training in relation to those who are not selected, and the number of diplomas issued among those who have been selected. The Committee also requests the Government to supply detailed information on the nature of the activities performed by young persons who are not selected to receive vocational training. It would appreciate that the Government supply the full text of the Regulations that are applicable in this respect.

2. The Committee notes that under the provisions of Decree No. 1253 of 30 June 1989 respecting civilian mobilisation in peacetime, such mobilisation is carried out to provide the labour force and technical means that are necessary in the event of extraordinary situations or disasters which result in particular difficulties for the national economy and the country. Civilian mobilisation applies to men between 18 and 60 and women between 18 and 55 years and may take the form of call-up at the workplace or compulsory labour in another enterprise, institution or organisation under penalty of a fine in the event of refusal (sections 1 to 5 and 9 of the Decree).

The Committee refers to the explanations given in paragraphs 63 to 66 of its 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour in which it noted that legislation which was intended to permit the call-up of labour in exceptional circumstances is sometimes worded in terms that might permit its application in circumstances other than cases of emergency in the sense of Article 2, paragraph 2(d), of the Convention. In order to avoid any uncertainty as to the compatibility of national provisions with the applicable international standards, it should be clear from the legislation itself that the power to exact labour is to be limited to what is strictly required in order to cope with circumstances endangering the existence or well-being of the whole or part of the population. Furthermore, once emergency measures are no longer necessary, and unless they are automatically limited in duration, they should be terminated by a formal and public decision or declaration. In this particular case, the concept of extraordinary situation or emergency resulting in particular difficulties for the national economy and the country exceeds the strict framework of the concept of emergency in the sense of the Convention.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on any application of the Decree and on the measures that have been taken or are envisaged to ensure that the circumstances set out in the legislation under which people may be called up are explicitly limited to situations that would endanger the existence or the well-being of the whole or part of the population, in accordance with Article 2, paragraph 2(d), of the Convention.

3. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the Government's statement that the conditions for termination of employment by officers and non-commissioned officers who are re-employed are governed by the Universal Military Service Act of 1958. The Committee once again requests the Government to transmit a copy of the 1958 Act, which the Government has announced that it will send, with any subsequent amendments.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

With reference to its previous comments concerning the restrictions on the freedom of members of co-operative farms to leave the farm at their own initiative, the Committee notes with satisfaction that under section 342 of the new Labour Code, which came into force in 1987, members of co-operatives may terminate their legal work relationship after giving 30 days' notice or, in certain cases, without notice.