Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Rwanda (Ratification: 1962)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments.

Repetition

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour imposed as a punishment for expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee previously noted that several sections of the Penal Code (Organic Law No. 01/2012/OL of 2 May 2012) provide for sanctions of imprisonment, which involve compulsory labour, in circumstances falling within the scope of the Convention (sections 116, 136, 451, 462, 463, 468 and 469). It expressed concern regarding information on prosecution of opposition politicians, journalists and human rights defenders as a means of discouraging them from freely expressing their opinions. The Committee requested the Government to ensure that no penal sanctions involving compulsory prison labour may be imposed on persons for peacefully expressing political views.

Concerning compulsory prison labour, the Committee notes the Government’s indication, in its report, that a draft law regulating correctional services is currently under the enactment process. The draft law would repeal the obligation of prisoners to perform activities for the development of the country, themselves and the prisons, provided for under section 50(8) of Act No. 34/2010 of 12 November 2010 on the establishment, functioning and organization of the Rwanda Correctional Service, in order to avoid any abuse that may result from its application. While noting this information, the Committee observes that section 35 of Act No. 68/2018 of 30 August 2018 determining offences and penalties in general, which replaced the Penal Code, provides that the court may order that the convict serve community service as a principal penalty in lieu of imprisonment when an offence is punishable by a term of imprisonment of up to five years. The Committee observes that the legislation in force continues to provide that persons sentenced to imprisonment are under an obligation to perform activities.

Legislation related to civil liberties and political freedoms. Referring to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest that, pursuant to Act No. 69/2019 of 8 November 2019 amending Act No. 68/2018, defamation against the President of the Republic and humiliation of national authorities are decriminalized. It notes, however, that, under a certain number of provisions of Act No. 68/2018, sanctions involving compulsory labour may still be imposed for acts related to civil liberties and political freedoms and through which persons can express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The provisions in question are as follows:

• section 161 concerning public insult;
• section 164 concerning the crime of “instigating divisions”;
• section 194 concerning the spread of false information or harmful propaganda with intent to cause a “hostile international opinion” against the Government;
• section 204 on causing uprising or unrest among the population; and
• section 225(1) and (2), concerning demonstration in a public place without prior authorization or illegal demonstration or public meeting (when security, public order or health is not threatened).

Legislation related to press and media freedoms. The Committee further notes that, pursuant to Act No. 02/2013 of 11 March 2013, regulating media, “the freedom of opinions and information shall not jeopardize the general public order and good morals …”. In that regard, it notes that several legislations adopted in recent years also provide for sanctions involving compulsory labour for acts through which persons express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. More particularly:

• Act No. 60/2018 of 22 August 2018 on prevention and punishment of cyber-crimes imposes up to five years’ imprisonment and a fine for publishing “rumours that may incite fear, ... or that may make a person lose their credibility” (section 39); and
• Act No. 24/2016 of 18 June 2016, governing information and communication technologies, prohibits the dissemination of “grossly offensive” or “indecent” messages, as well as the use of information and communications technology to cause “annoyance, inconvenience, or needless anxiety” (section 60), and provides that any person who, knowingly or wilfully, publishes, transmits or causes to be published in electronic form, any “indecent” information commits an offence punishable in accordance with the provisions of the Penal Code (section 206).

The Committee also notes that, , as recently highlighted in the framework of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Council, several UN treaty bodies and Special Rapporteurs continued to express serious concerns at prosecutions of politicians, journalists and human rights defenders, as a means of discouraging them from freely expressing their opinions (A/HRC/WG.6/37/RWA/2, 13 November 2020, paragraph 45; letter dated 30 May 2018 from the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression; and CAT/C/RWA/CO/2, 21 December 2017, paragraphs 52–53). In the framework of the UPR, a number of recommendations formulated by the Working Group, and supported by Rwanda, referred to the elimination from the legislation of provisions that undermine freedom of expression and the protection of journalists and members of the media and civil society against harassment and intimidation (A/HRC/47/14, 25 March 2021, paragraphs 134-136).

The Committee notes with deep concern this information. The Committee observes that the above-mentioned provisions of Act No. 68/2018 of 30 August 2018, Act No. 60/2018 of 22 August 2018 and Act No. 24/2016 of 18 June 2016, are worded in terms broad enough to lend themselves to their application as a means of punishment for peacefully expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. In so far as these provisions are enforceable with penal sanctions which involve compulsory labour, they fall within the scope of the Convention. The Committee recalls that legal guarantees of rights to freedom of thought and expression, freedom of peaceful assembly, freedom of association, as well as freedom from arbitrary arrest, constitute an important safeguard against the imposition of compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political or ideological views (2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 302). The Committee therefore urges the Government to ensure that persons who, by means of methods that neither use violence nor incite to violence, express political views or views opposed to the established political, social or economic system do not incur penal sanctions involving an obligation to work. It expresses the firm hope that the Government will take the necessary measures to review the above-mentioned provisions of Act No. 68/2018 of 30 August 2018 determining offences and penalties in general; Act No. 60/2018 of 22 August 2018 on prevention and punishment of cyber crimes; and Act No. 24/2016 of 18 June 2016 governing information and communication technologies, for example by clearly restricting the scope of these provisions to situations connected with the use of violence or incitement to violence, or by repealing sanctions involving compulsory labour (such as compulsory prison labour or compulsory community service). In the meantime, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of these provisions in practice, including on the number of prosecutions initiated and convictions handed down, as well as information on the facts that led to them.

Article 1(d). Sanctions for participating in strikes. The Committee notes the adoption of Act No. 66/2018 of 30 August 2018 regulating labour, which provides for a number of restrictions on the exercise of the right to strike, by considering a strike as being legal only when the arbitration committee has exceeded 15 working days without issuing its decision or the conciliation resolution on collective dispute or the court award being enforceable have not been implemented (section 105). It notes that section 118 of Act No. 66/2018 provides for sanctions of imprisonment for a term of not less than six months, involving compulsory labour, for employees who go on strike illegally. The Committee further notes the adoption of Ministerial Order No. 004/19.20 of 17 March 2020, determining essential services that should not be interrupted during strikes or lock-outs, which repealed Ministerial Order No. 4 of 13 July 2010. It observes that services related to communication, transportation or education are still considered as essential services, and that section 6 of the Ministerial Order provides that other services may be considered as essential services “for public interest”. Furthermore, employees are prohibited from exercising a strike within ten days preceding or following elections in the country (section 8). The Committee wishes to draw the Government’s attention to the fact that the right to strike may only be restricted or prohibited in essential services in the strict sense of the term (namely, in services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population), in the public service only for public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, or in situations of acute national crisis (see General Survey, paragraph 314). The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures, both in law and in practice, to ensure that no worker who participates peacefully in a strike can be liable and sentenced to penal sanctions involving compulsory labour.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour imposed as a punishment for expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee previously noted that several sections of the Penal Code (Organic Law No. 01/2012/OL of 2 May 2012) provide for sanctions of imprisonment, which involve compulsory labour, in circumstances falling within the scope of the Convention (sections 116, 136, 451, 462, 463, 468 and 469). It expressed concern regarding information on prosecution of opposition politicians, journalists and human rights defenders as a means of discouraging them from freely expressing their opinions. The Committee requested the Government to ensure that no penal sanctions involving compulsory prison labour may be imposed on persons for peacefully expressing political views.

Concerning compulsory prison labour, the Committee notes the Government’s indication, in its report, that a draft law regulating correctional services is currently under the enactment process. The draft law would repeal the obligation of prisoners to perform activities for the development of the country, themselves and the prisons, provided for under section 50(8) of Act No. 34/2010 of 12 November 2010 on the establishment, functioning and organization of the Rwanda Correctional Service, in order to avoid any abuse that may result from its application. While noting this information, the Committee observes that section 35 of Act No. 68/2018 of 30 August 2018 determining offences and penalties in general, which replaced the Penal Code, provides that the court may order that the convict serve community service as a principal penalty in lieu of imprisonment when an offence is punishable by a term of imprisonment of up to five years. The Committee observes that the legislation in force continues to provide that persons sentenced to imprisonment are under an obligation to perform activities.

Legislation related to civil liberties and political freedoms. Referring to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest that, pursuant to Act No. 69/2019 of 8 November 2019 amending Act No. 68/2018, defamation against the President of the Republic and humiliation of national authorities are decriminalized. It notes, however, that, under a certain number of provisions of Act No. 68/2018, sanctions involving compulsory labour may still be imposed for acts related to civil liberties and political freedoms and through which persons can express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The provisions in question are as follows:

• –section 161 concerning public insult;
• –section 164 concerning the crime of “instigating divisions”;
• –section 194 concerning the spread of false information or harmful propaganda with intent to cause a “hostile international opinion” against the Government;
• –section 204 on causing uprising or unrest among the population; and
• –section 225(1) and (2), concerning demonstration in a public place without prior authorization or illegal demonstration or public meeting (when security, public order or health is not threatened).

Legislation related to press and media freedoms. The Committee further notes that, pursuant to Act No. 02/2013 of 11 March 2013, regulating media, “the freedom of opinions and information shall not jeopardize the general public order and good morals …”. In that regard, it notes that several legislations adopted in recent years also provide for sanctions involving compulsory labour for acts through which persons express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. More particularly:

• –Act No. 60/2018 of 22 August 2018 on prevention and punishment of cyber-crimes imposes up to five years’ imprisonment and a fine for publishing “rumours that may incite fear, ... or that may make a person lose their credibility” (section 39); and
• –Act No. 24/2016 of 18 June 2016, governing information and communication technologies, prohibits the dissemination of “grossly offensive” or “indecent” messages, as well as the use of information and communications technology to cause “annoyance, inconvenience, or needless anxiety” (section 60), and provides that any person who, knowingly or wilfully, publishes, transmits or causes to be published in electronic form, any “indecent” information commits an offence punishable in accordance with the provisions of the Penal Code (section 206).

The Committee also notes that, , as recently highlighted in the framework of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Council, several UN treaty bodies and Special Rapporteurs continued to express serious concerns at prosecutions of politicians, journalists and human rights defenders, as a means of discouraging them from freely expressing their opinions (A/HRC/WG.6/37/RWA/2, 13 November 2020, paragraph 45; letter dated 30 May 2018 from the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression; and CAT/C/RWA/CO/2, 21 December 2017, paragraphs 52–53). In the framework of the UPR, a number of recommendations formulated by the Working Group, and supported by Rwanda, referred to the elimination from the legislation of provisions that undermine freedom of expression and the protection of journalists and members of the media and civil society against harassment and intimidation (A/HRC/47/14, 25 March 2021, paragraphs 134-136).

The Committee notes with deepconcern this information. The Committee observes that the above-mentioned provisions of Act No. 68/2018 of 30 August 2018, Act No. 60/2018 of 22 August 2018 and Act No. 24/2016 of 18 June 2016, are worded in terms broad enough to lend themselves to their application as a means of punishment for peacefully expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. In so far as these provisions are enforceable with penal sanctions which involve compulsory labour, they fall within the scope of the Convention. The Committee recalls that legal guarantees of rights to freedom of thought and expression, freedom of peaceful assembly, freedom of association, as well as freedom from arbitrary arrest, constitute an important safeguard against the imposition of compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political or ideological views (2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 302). The Committee therefore urges the Government to ensure that persons who, by means of methods that neither use violence nor incite to violence, express political views or views opposed to the established political, social or economic system do not incur penal sanctions involving an obligation to work. It expresses the firm hope that the Government will take the necessary measures to review the above-mentioned provisions of Act No. 68/2018 of 30 August 2018 determining offences and penalties in general; Act No. 60/2018 of 22 August 2018 on prevention and punishment of cyber crimes; and Act No. 24/2016 of 18 June 2016 governing information and communication technologies, for example by clearly restricting the scope of these provisions to situations connected with the use of violence or incitement to violence, or by repealing sanctions involving compulsory labour (such as compulsory prison labour or compulsory community service). In the meantime, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of these provisions in practice, including on the number of prosecutions initiated and convictions handed down, as well as information on the facts that led to them.

Article 1(d). Sanctions for participating in strikes. The Committee notes the adoption of Act No. 66/2018 of 30 August 2018 regulating labour, which provides for a number of restrictions on the exercise of the right to strike, by considering a strike as being legal only when the arbitration committee has exceeded 15 working days without issuing its decision or the conciliation resolution on collective dispute or the court award being enforceable have not been implemented (section 105). It notes that section 118 of Act No. 66/2018 provides for sanctions of imprisonment for a term of not less than six months, involving compulsory labour, for employees who go on strike illegally. The Committee further notes the adoption of Ministerial Order No. 004/19.20 of 17 March 2020, determining essential services that should not be interrupted during strikes or lock-outs, which repealed Ministerial Order No. 4 of 13 July 2010. It observes that services related to communication, transportation or education are still considered as essential services, and that section 6 of the Ministerial Order provides that other services may be considered as essential services “for public interest”. Furthermore, employees are prohibited from exercising a strike within ten days preceding or following elections in the country (section 8). The Committee wishes to draw the Government’s attention to the fact that the right to strike may only be restricted or prohibited in essential services in the strict sense of the term (namely, in services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population), in the public service only for public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, or in situations of acute national crisis (see General Survey, paragraph 314). The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures, both in law and in practice, to ensure that no worker who participates peacefully in a strike can be liable and sentenced to penal sanctions involving compulsory labour.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

The Committee notes with concern that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments.

Repetition

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Prison sentences involving compulsory labour imposed as a punishment for expressing political views. The Committee previously noted that, according to section 50(8) of Law No. 34/2010 of 12 November 2010 on the establishment, functioning and organization of Rwanda Correctional Service, an incarcerated person has the main obligation, inter alia, to perform activities for the development of the country, himself/herself and the prison. The Committee further took note of the Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association who conducted an official visit to Rwanda in January 2014 (A/HRC/26/29/Add.2). The Special Rapporteur noted with concern the Government’s prevailing hostility towards peaceful initiatives by its critics and the existence of a legal framework that silences dissent. In this regard, the Special Rapporteur referred to several provisions of the Penal Code which provide for sanctions of imprisonment for persons expressing political views (sections 116, 136, 451, 462, 463, 468 and 469 of the Penal Code). Noting that any reference made to compulsory prison labour had been removed from the Penal Code, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the measures taken in order to harmonize the Code of Penal Procedure with the Penal Code. The Committee also requested the Government to provide a copy of the draft Ministerial Order on the nature of income-generating activities which can be performed by prisoners.

The Committee notes the Government’s information in its report that Law No. 30/2013 of 24 May 2013 relating to the Code of Penal Procedure has removed the reference to compulsory prison labour. However, the Committee notes that section 50(8) of Law No. 34/2010 remains valid, under which an incarcerated person can be obliged to work for the development of the country, himself/herself and the prison. The Government also considers sections 116, 136, 451, 462, 463, 468 and 469 of the Penal Code as compatible with the Convention without providing further explanation, and indicates that there are no court decisions in this regard. However, the Committee notes that the UN Human Rights Committee expressed its concern in its concluding observations on the fourth periodic report of Rwanda of 2 May 2016, at the prosecution of opposition politicians, journalists and human rights defenders as a means of discouraging them from freely expressing their opinions (CCPR/C/RWA/CO/4, paragraphs 39 and 40).

The Committee once again recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a punishment for peacefully holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It once again draws the attention of the Government to the fact that the abovementioned sections of the Penal Code are worded in terms broad enough to lend themselves to the application as a means of punishment for peacefully expressing political views and, in so far as they are enforceable with sanctions of imprisonment which involve compulsory labour, they may fall within the scope of the Convention. The Committee further notes that the draft Ministerial Order on the nature of income-generating activities which can be performed by prisoners is not attached as indicated in the Government’s report. The Committee therefore requests the Government to ensure that no penal sanctions involving compulsory prison labour may be imposed on persons for peacefully expressing political views, for example, by amending section 50(8) of Law No. 34/2010 following the adoption of Law No. 30/2013. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the application of sections 116, 136, 451, 462, 463, 468 and 469 of the Penal Code in practice, including any legal proceedings defining or illustrating their scope. The Committee finally once again requests the Government to provide a copy of the draft Ministerial Order on the nature of income-generating activities which can be performed by prisoners.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments.

Repetition

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Prison sentences involving compulsory labour imposed as a punishment for expressing political views. The Committee previously noted that, according to section 50(8) of Law No. 34/2010 of 12 November 2010 on the establishment, functioning and organization of Rwanda Correctional Service, an incarcerated person has the main obligation, inter alia, to perform activities for the development of the country, himself/herself and the prison. The Committee further took note of the Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association who conducted an official visit to Rwanda in January 2014 (A/HRC/26/29/Add.2). The Special Rapporteur noted with concern the Government’s prevailing hostility towards peaceful initiatives by its critics and the existence of a legal framework that silences dissent. In this regard, the Special Rapporteur referred to several provisions of the Penal Code which provide for sanctions of imprisonment for persons expressing political views (sections 116, 136, 451, 462, 463, 468 and 469 of the Penal Code). Noting that any reference made to compulsory prison labour had been removed from the Penal Code, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the measures taken in order to harmonize the Code of Penal Procedure with the Penal Code. The Committee also requested the Government to provide a copy of the draft Ministerial Order on the nature of income-generating activities which can be performed by prisoners.

The Committee notes the Government’s information in its report that Law No. 30/2013 of 24 May 2013 relating to the Code of Penal Procedure has removed the reference to compulsory prison labour. However, the Committee notes that section 50(8) of Law No. 34/2010 remains valid, under which an incarcerated person can be obliged to work for the development of the country, himself/herself and the prison. The Government also considers sections 116, 136, 451, 462, 463, 468 and 469 of the Penal Code as compatible with the Convention without providing further explanation, and indicates that there are no court decisions in this regard. However, the Committee notes that the UN Human Rights Committee expressed its concern in its concluding observations on the fourth periodic report of Rwanda of 2 May 2016, at the prosecution of opposition politicians, journalists and human rights defenders as a means of discouraging them from freely expressing their opinions (CCPR/C/RWA/CO/4, paragraphs 39 and 40).

The Committee once again recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a punishment for peacefully holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It once again draws the attention of the Government to the fact that the abovementioned sections of the Penal Code are worded in terms broad enough to lend themselves to the application as a means of punishment for peacefully expressing political views and, in so far as they are enforceable with sanctions of imprisonment which involve compulsory labour, they may fall within the scope of the Convention. The Committee further notes that the draft Ministerial Order on the nature of income-generating activities which can be performed by prisoners is not attached as indicated in the Government’s report. The Committee therefore requests the Government to ensure that no penal sanctions involving compulsory prison labour may be imposed on persons for peacefully expressing political views, for example, by amending section 50(8) of Law No. 34/2010 following the adoption of Law No. 30/2013. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the application of sections 116, 136, 451, 462, 463, 468 and 469 of the Penal Code in practice, including any legal proceedings defining or illustrating their scope. The Committee finally once again requests the Government to provide a copy of the draft Ministerial Order on the nature of income-generating activities which can be performed by prisoners.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

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

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Prison sentences involving compulsory labour imposed as a punishment for expressing political views. The Committee previously noted that, according to section 50(8) of Law No. 34/2010 of 12 November 2010 on the establishment, functioning and organization of Rwanda Correctional Service, an incarcerated person has the main obligation, inter alia, to perform activities for the development of the country, himself/herself and the prison. The Committee further took note of the Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association who conducted an official visit to Rwanda in January 2014 (A/HRC/26/29/Add.2). The Special Rapporteur noted with concern the Government’s prevailing hostility towards peaceful initiatives by its critics and the existence of a legal framework that silences dissent. In this regard, the Special Rapporteur referred to several provisions of the Penal Code which provide for sanctions of imprisonment for persons expressing political views (sections 116, 136, 451, 462, 463, 468 and 469 of the Penal Code). Noting that any reference made to compulsory prison labour had been removed from the Penal Code, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the measures taken in order to harmonize the Code of Penal Procedure with the Penal Code. The Committee also requested the Government to provide a copy of the draft Ministerial Order on the nature of income-generating activities which can be performed by prisoners.

The Committee notes the Government’s information in its report that Law No. 30/2013 of 24 May 2013 relating to the Code of Penal Procedure has removed the reference to compulsory prison labour. However, the Committee notes that section 50(8) of Law No. 34/2010 remains valid, under which an incarcerated person can be obliged to work for the development of the country, himself/herself and the prison. The Government also considers sections 116, 136, 451, 462, 463, 468 and 469 of the Penal Code as compatible with the Convention without providing further explanation, and indicates that there are no court decisions in this regard. However, the Committee notes that the UN Human Rights Committee expressed its concern in its concluding observations on the fourth periodic report of Rwanda of 2 May 2016, at the prosecution of opposition politicians, journalists and human rights defenders as a means of discouraging them from freely expressing their opinions (CCPR/C/RWA/CO/4, paragraphs 39 and 40).

The Committee once again recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a punishment for peacefully holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It once again draws the attention of the Government to the fact that the abovementioned sections of the Penal Code are worded in terms broad enough to lend themselves to the application as a means of punishment for peacefully expressing political views and, in so far as they are enforceable with sanctions of imprisonment which involve compulsory labour, they may fall within the scope of the Convention. The Committee further notes that the draft Ministerial Order on the nature of income-generating activities which can be performed by prisoners is not attached as indicated in the Government’s report. The Committee therefore requests the Government to ensure that no penal sanctions involving compulsory prison labour may be imposed on persons for peacefully expressing political views, for example, by amending section 50(8) of Law No. 34/2010 following the adoption of Law No. 30/2013. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the application of sections 116, 136, 451, 462, 463, 468 and 469 of the Penal Code in practice, including any legal proceedings defining or illustrating their scope. The Committee finally once again requests the Government to provide a copy of the draft Ministerial Order on the nature of income-generating activities which can be performed by prisoners.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

Repetition

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Prison sentences involving compulsory labour imposed as a punishment for expressing political views. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the Government’s indication that Law No. 34/2010 of 12 November 2010 on the establishment, functioning and organization of Rwanda Correctional Service provides that an incarcerated person may be requested or can himself/herself request to perform work, but he/she cannot be forced to perform it. The prisoner who performs work shall not be forced to work beyond his/her capacity or perform work that degrades him/her. The Government also added that the Penal Code had been harmonized and there is no longer a provision forcing the prisoner to work; the Code of Penal Procedure will also be harmonized in this respect. The Committee requested the Government to provide copies of abovementioned Law No. 34/2010 to assess its compatibility with the Convention, as well as information on the progress achieved in the adoption of appropriate measures to harmonize the provisions of the Code of Penal Procedure in order to remove any reference made to compulsory prison labour.

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government which indicates that the nature of income-generating activities which can be performed by incarcerated persons must be determined by a draft Ministerial Order. The Committee takes note of Law No. 34/2010 on the establishment, functioning and organization of the Rwanda Correctional Service, copy of which has been forwarded by the Government with its report. More particularly, the Committee notes that according to section 43 of Law No. 34/2010, “if possible, incarcerated persons shall have the right to perform any activity in relation to their professional skills, and those with no professional skills shall be trained”. The Committee further notes that according to section 45 of the Law, “an incarcerated person may be requested or can himself/herself request to perform work, but he/she cannot be forced to perform it, with the exception of the provision of Section 50, point 8 of this Law”. Point 8 provides that “an incarcerated person has the main obligation”, inter alia, “to perform activities for the development of the country, himself/herself and the prison”. The Committee further takes note of the Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association who conducted an official visit to Rwanda in January 2014 (A/HRC/26/29/Add.2). The Special Rapporteur noted with concern the Government’s prevailing hostility towards peaceful initiatives by its critics and the existence of a legal framework that silences dissent. In this regard, the Special Rapporteur referred to several provisions of the Penal Code which provide for sanctions of imprisonment for persons expressing political views (sections 116, 136, 451, 462, 463, 468 and 469 of the Penal Code).

Referring to its comments addressed to the Government under the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), the Committee draws the attention of the Government to the broad terms used to define the exception under section 50(8) of Law No. 34/2010 on the establishment, functioning and organization of Rwanda Correctional Service and observes that despite the Government’s indication that prison labour is a voluntary activity, the legislation provides that an incarcerated person has the main obligation to perform activities for the development of the country, himself/herself and the prison. The Committee recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a punishment for peacefully holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It draws the attention of the Government to the fact that, as highlighted by the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, sections 116, 136, 451, 462, 463, 468 and 469 of the Penal Code are worded in terms broad enough to lend themselves to the application as a means of punishment for peacefully expressing political views and, in so far as they are enforceable with sanctions of imprisonment which can involve compulsory labour, they may fall within the scope of the Convention.

The Committee requests the Government to ensure that no penal sanctions involving compulsory prison labour may be imposed on persons for peacefully expressing political views, thereby ensuring conformity with the Convention. To this end, the Committee asks the Government to provide information on the application of sections 45 and 50(8) of Law No. 34/2010 on the establishment, functioning and organization of Rwanda Correctional Service, as well as on sections 116, 136, 451, 462, 463, 468 and 469 of the Penal Code in practice, including copies of court decisions defining or illustrating their scope as well as the sanctions applied. Noting that any reference made to compulsory prison labour has been removed from the Penal Code, the Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken in order to harmonize the Code of Penal Procedure to that effect. Please provide a copy of the currently drafted Ministerial Order on the nature of income-generating activities which can be performed by prisoners, once adopted.

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

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Prison sentences involving compulsory labour imposed as a punishment for expressing political views. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the Government’s indication that Law No. 34/2010 of 12 November 2010 on the establishment, functioning and organization of Rwanda Correctional Service provides that an incarcerated person may be requested or can himself/herself request to perform work, but he/she cannot be forced to perform it. The prisoner who performs work shall not be forced to work beyond his/her capacity or perform work that degrades him/her. The Government also added that the Penal Code had been harmonized and there is no longer a provision forcing the prisoner to work; the Code of Penal Procedure will also be harmonized in this respect. The Committee requested the Government to provide copies of abovementioned Law No. 34/2010 to assess its compatibility with the Convention, as well as information on the progress achieved in the adoption of appropriate measures to harmonize the provisions of the Code of Penal Procedure in order to remove any reference made to compulsory prison labour.

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government which indicates that the nature of income-generating activities which can be performed by incarcerated persons must be determined by a draft Ministerial Order. The Committee takes note of Law No. 34/2010 on the establishment, functioning and organization of the Rwanda Correctional Service, copy of which has been forwarded by the Government with its report. More particularly, the Committee notes that according to section 43 of Law No. 34/2010, “if possible, incarcerated persons shall have the right to perform any activity in relation to their professional skills, and those with no professional skills shall be trained”. The Committee further notes that according to section 45 of the Law, “an incarcerated person may be requested or can himself/herself request to perform work, but he/she cannot be forced to perform it, with the exception of the provision of Section 50, point 8 of this Law”. Point 8 provides that “an incarcerated person has the main obligation”, inter alia, “to perform activities for the development of the country, himself/herself and the prison”. The Committee further takes note of the Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association who conducted an official visit to Rwanda in January 2014 (A/HRC/26/29/Add.2). The Special Rapporteur noted with concern the Government’s prevailing hostility towards peaceful initiatives by its critics and the existence of a legal framework that silences dissent. In this regard, the Special Rapporteur referred to several provisions of the Penal Code which provide for sanctions of imprisonment for persons expressing political views (sections 116, 136, 451, 462, 463, 468 and 469 of the Penal Code).

Referring to its comments addressed to the Government under the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), the Committee draws the attention of the Government to the broad terms used to define the exception under section 50(8) of Law No. 34/2010 on the establishment, functioning and organization of Rwanda Correctional Service and observes that despite the Government’s indication that prison labour is a voluntary activity, the legislation provides that an incarcerated person has the main obligation to perform activities for the development of the country, himself/herself and the prison. The Committee recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a punishment for peacefully holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It draws the attention of the Government to the fact that, as highlighted by the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, sections 116, 136, 451, 462, 463, 468 and 469 of the Penal Code are worded in terms broad enough to lend themselves to the application as a means of punishment for peacefully expressing political views and, in so far as they are enforceable with sanctions of imprisonment which can involve compulsory labour, they may fall within the scope of the Convention.

The Committee requests the Government to ensure that no penal sanctions involving compulsory prison labour may be imposed on persons for peacefully expressing political views, thereby ensuring conformity with the Convention. To this end, the Committee asks the Government to provide information on the application of sections 45 and 50(8) of Law No. 34/2010 on the establishment, functioning and organization of Rwanda Correctional Service, as well as on sections 116, 136, 451, 462, 463, 468 and 469 of the Penal Code in practice, including copies of court decisions defining or illustrating their scope as well as the sanctions applied. Noting that any reference made to compulsory prison labour has been removed from the Penal Code, the Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken in order to harmonize the Code of Penal Procedure to that effect. Please provide a copy of the currently drafted Ministerial Order on the nature of income-generating activities which can be performed by prisoners, once adopted.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

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:

Repetition

Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. Prison sentences involving compulsory labour imposed as a punishment for expressing political views, as a means of labour discipline and as punishment for participating in strikes. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 29 of Act No. 38/2006 of 25 September 2006 creating and organizing the national prison service provides that prisoners are entitled to perform an activity related to their occupational skills. Moreover, section 40 provides that the prisoner may be asked, or express the wish to perform work, but may not be forced to do so.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that Law No. 34/2010 of 12 November 2010 on the establishment, functioning and organization of Rwanda Correctional Service repealed the previous Act No. 38/2006. The Government indicates that section 50 of Law No. 34/2010 provides that an incarcerated person may be requested or can himself/herself request to perform work, but he/she cannot be forced to perform it. The prisoner who performs work shall not be forced to work beyond his/her capacity or perform work that degrades him/her. The Government also adds that the Penal Code has been harmonized and there is no longer a provision forcing the prisoner to work. Moreover, the Code of Penal Procedure will also be harmonized in this respect.

While noting that the new legislation seems to have abolished the compulsory nature of prison labour, the Committee requests the Government to provide copies of Law No. 34/2010 on the establishment, functioning and organization of Rwanda Correctional Service to assess its compatibility with the Convention. Please provide information on the progress achieved in the adoption of appropriate measures to harmonize the provisions of the Code of Penal Procedure with those of section 50 of Law No. 34/2010 on the establishment, functioning and organization of Rwanda Correctional Service, as well as information on the effect given in practice to this legislation.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. Prison sentences involving compulsory labour imposed as a punishment for expressing political views, as a means of labour discipline and as punishment for participating in strikes. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 29 of Act No. 38/2006 of 25 September 2006 creating and organizing the national prison service provides that prisoners are entitled to perform an activity related to their occupational skills. Moreover, section 40 provides that the prisoner may be asked, or express the wish to perform work, but may not be forced to do so.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that Law No. 34/2010 of 12 November 2010 on the establishment, functioning and organization of Rwanda Correctional Service repealed the previous Act No. 38/2006. The Government indicates that section 50 of Law No. 34/2010 provides that an incarcerated person may be requested or can himself/herself request to perform work, but he/she cannot be forced to perform it. The prisoner who performs work shall not be forced to work beyond his/her capacity or perform work that degrades him/her. The Government also adds that the Penal Code has been harmonized and there is no longer a provision forcing the prisoner to work. Moreover, the Code of Penal Procedure will also be harmonized in this respect.

While noting that the new legislation seems to have abolished the compulsory nature of prison labour, the Committee requests the Government to provide copies of Law No. 34/2010 on the establishment, functioning and organization of Rwanda Correctional Service to assess its compatibility with the Convention. Please provide information on the progress achieved in the adoption of appropriate measures to harmonize the provisions of the Code of Penal Procedure with those of section 50 of Law No. 34/2010 on the establishment, functioning and organization of Rwanda Correctional Service, as well as information on the effect given in practice to this legislation.

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

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:

Repetition

Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. Prison sentences involving compulsory labour imposed as a punishment for expressing political views, as a means of labour discipline and as punishment for participating in strikes. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 29 of Act No. 38/2006 of 25 September 2006 to create and organize the national prison service provides that prisoners are entitled to perform an activity related to their occupational skills. Moreover, section 40 provides that the prisoner may be asked, or express the wish to perform work, but may not be forced to do so.

The Government indicates that the Penal Code and the Code of Penal Procedure will soon be harmonized, particularly since the Penal Code is currently being amended. The Government adds that the consent of prisoners to perform work is given orally and that prisoners who perform work which generates income receive payment amounting to 10 per cent of the total product of the work performed. The Committee invites the Government to provide information on the progress achieved in the adoption of appropriate measures to harmonize the provisions of the Penal Code and the Code of Penal Procedure with those of section 40 of the Act of 2006 to create and organize the national prison service. Please also provide information on the effect given in practice to this legislation.

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

Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. Prison sentences involving compulsory labour imposed as a punishment for expressing political views, as a means of labour discipline and as punishment for participating in strikes. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 29 of Act No. 38/2006 of 25 September 2006 to create and organize the national prison service provides that prisoners are entitled to perform an activity related to their occupational skills. Moreover, section 40 provides that the prisoner may be asked, or express the wish to perform work, but may not be forced to do so.

The Government indicates in its report that the Penal Code and the Code of Penal Procedure will soon be harmonized, particularly since the Penal Code is currently being amended. The Government adds that the consent of prisoners to perform work is given orally and that prisoners who perform work which generates income receive payment amounting to 10 per cent of the total product of the work performed. The Committee invites the Government to provide information on the progress achieved in the adoption of appropriate measures to harmonize the provisions of the Penal Code and the Code of Penal Procedure with those of section 40 of the Act of 2006 to create and organize the national prison service. Please also provide information on the effect given in practice to this legislation.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

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 1, subparagraphs a, c and d, of the Convention. Prison sentences involving compulsory labour imposed as a punishment for expressing political views, as a means of labour discipline and as punishment for participating in strikes. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the national legislation provided for an obligation to work for all convicted prisoners (section 39 of the Penal Code and section 40 of Ordinance No. 111/127 of 20 May 1961 to organize the prison system). It drew the Government’s attention to a number of provisions in the national legislation under which certain activities enjoying protection under the Convention may be punished by imprisonment involving compulsory work:

–      peaceful activities which may contribute to the expression of political views or opposition to the established political, social or economic system (section 9 of Act No. 33/91 of 5 August 1991 on demonstrations on public highways and public meetings; sections 166 and 167 of the Penal Code; section 83 of Act No. 18/2002 of 11 May 2002 governing the press; section 46 of Act No. 16/2003 of 27 June 2003 governing political parties and politicians);

–      breaches of discipline by seafarers (section 29 of the Decree of 1 April 1933 establishing articles of agreement for inland navigation and sections 13 and 14 of the Decree of 11 May 1921 establishing the disciplinary and penal code for inland navigation);

–      participation in strikes (section 190 of the Labour Code: lack of clarity as to the nature of the penalties that may be imposed as a result of legal action by the employer against workers who have participated in a strike deemed to be unlawful).

The Committee notes the adoption of Act No. 38/2006 of 25 September 2006 to create and organize the national prison service, which repeals Ordinance No. 111/127 of 30 May 1961 establishing the penitentiary service of Rwanda. According to section 29 of the abovementioned Act, prisoners are entitled to carry out an activity related to their occupational skills. While section 39 establishes an obligation for prisoners to carry out an activity that generates income for the prisoner or for the prison, section 40 specifies that the prisoner must be asked, or express the wish, to carry out work but may not be forced to do so.

In view of the fact that the new legislation appears to have abolished the compulsory nature of prison labour, the Committee requests the Government to indicate how, in practice, the consent of the prisoner is obtained. It also wishes to draw the Government’s attention to the need to harmonize the provisions of the Penal Code and the Code of Penal Procedure with those of section 40 of the Act of 2006 to create and organize the national prison service. Both the Penal Code (section 39) and the Code of Penal Procedure (section 218) refer to work “imposed” on prisoners serving a custodial sentence. Please indicate the measures taken to amend these provisions in order to avoid any ambiguity in the law.

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

Article 1(a), (c) and (d) of the Convention. Prison sentences involving compulsory labour imposed as a punishment for expressing political views, as a means of labour discipline and as punishment for participating in strikes. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the national legislation provided for an obligation to work for all convicted prisoners (section 39 of the Penal Code and section 40 of Ordinance No. 111/127 of 20 May 1961 to organize the prison system). It drew the Government’s attention to a number of provisions in the national legislation under which certain activities enjoying protection under the Convention may be punished by imprisonment involving compulsory work:

–      peaceful activities which may contribute to the expression of political views or opposition to the established political, social or economic system (section 9 of Act No. 33/91 of 5 August 1991 on demonstrations on public highways and public meetings; sections 166 and 167 of the Penal Code; section 83 of Act No. 18/2002 of 11 May 2002 governing the press; section 46 of Act No. 16/2003 of 27 June 2003 governing political parties and politicians);

–      breaches of discipline by seafarers (section 29 of the Decree of 1 April 1933 establishing articles of agreement for inland navigation and sections 13 and 14 of the Decree of 11 May 1921 establishing the disciplinary and penal code for inland navigation);

–      participation in strikes (section 190 of the Labour Code: lack of clarity as to the nature of the penalties that may be imposed as a result of legal action by the employer against workers who have participated in a strike deemed to be unlawful).

The Committee notes the adoption of Act No. 38/2006 of 25 September 2006 to create and organize the national prison service, which repeals Ordinance No. 111/127 of 30 May 1961 establishing the penitentiary service of Rwanda. According to section 29 of the abovementioned Act, prisoners are entitled to carry out an activity related to their occupational skills. While section 39 establishes an obligation for prisoners to carry out an activity that generates income for the prisoner or for the prison, section 40 specifies that the prisoner must be asked, or express the wish, to carry out work but may not be forced to do so.

In view of the fact that the new legislation appears to have abolished the compulsory nature of prison labour, the Committee requests the Government to indicate how, in practice, the consent of the prisoner is obtained. It also wishes to draw the Government’s attention to the need to harmonize the provisions of the Penal Code and the Code of Penal Procedure with those of section 40 of the Act of 2006 to create and organize the national prison service. Both the Penal Code (section 39) and the Code of Penal Procedure (section 218) refer to work “imposed” on prisoners serving a custodial sentence. Please indicate the measures taken to amend these provisions in order to avoid any ambiguity in the law.

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

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Imposition of sentences of imprisonment involving the obligation to work as a punishment for expressing political views or views that are ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system

In its previous comments, the Committee recalled that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits recourse to forced or compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It noted that all persons convicted to a prison sentence are under the obligation to work, in accordance with section 39 of the Penal Code and section 40 of Ordinance No. 111/127 of 20 May 1961 on the organization of the prison system. The Committee noted in this respect that the following provisions of the legislation make it possible to prosecute and penalize with imprisonment activities which may contribute to the expression of political views or opposition to the established political, social or economic system:

-  sections 166 and 167 of the Penal Code, under which any person who makes use of the spoken, written or printed word to incite or attempt to incite the general public against the public authorities or to alarm the general public, or any person who impugns the binding force of the law may be punished with a sentence of imprisonment;

-  section 83 of Act No. 18/2002 concerning the press, under which any person who, by means of the press, incites a third party to commit crimes or offences punishable by the Penal Code shall be deemed an accomplice and liable to the penalties laid down by the said Code if such incitement has repercussions or results in an attempted crime or offence (taking account of sections 166 and 167 of the Penal Code referred to above);

-  section 46 of Act No. 16/2003 of 27 June 2003, concerning political groupings and politicians, under which, without prejudice to the penal provisions, any person who establishes or runs a political grouping in violation of the legislation shall be liable to imprisonment for between six months and two years and a fine of 500,000 to 1 million Rwandan francs or either of these two penalties, and any person who runs or participates in a political grouping which continues to operate after being suspended or a political grouping which is reconstituted after being dissolved, shall be liable to the same penalties.

In order to be able to assess the scope of these provisions and their effect on the application of the Committee, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on their application in practice and copies of related court decisions.

In its latest report, the Government indicates that copies of any rulings handed down have been requested from the Supreme Court and will be forwarded when they have been received. The Committee notes this information and reiterates its previous request. Information on the effect given in practice to the above provisions is necessary so that the Committee can assess their scope and ensure that activities relating to the expression of certain political views or of ideological opposition to the established political, social or economic system, without recourse to violence, are not punished by imprisonment including compulsory labour.

Article 1(c). Imposition of forced labour as a means of labour discipline

For many years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to section 29 of the Decree of 1 April 1983, establishing articles of agreement for inland navigation, and to sections 13 and 14 of the Decree of 11 May 1921, establishing the disciplinary and penal code for inland navigation, which are contrary to this provision of the Convention inasmuch as they allow prison sentences involving compulsory labour to be imposed on sailors for breaches of labour discipline. In this regard, the Government stated previously that no cases involving the imprisonment of sailors for breaches of labour discipline had occurred, given the virtually non-existent traffic on Lake Kivu. In its latest report, the Government confirms the absence of prison sentences and court rulings in this respect, and indicates that the provisions in question have fallen into abeyance and that new legislation taking into account current realities should be developed. In view of this information, the Committee trusts that the Government will not fail to take the necessary measures to amend or repeal these provisions so as to ensure that no sentence of imprisonment involving compulsory labour can be imposed on sailors in cases of breaches of labour discipline.

Article 1(d). Imposition of sentences of imprisonment involving compulsory labour as a punishment for having participated in strikes

1. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, under section 191 of the Labour Code (Act No. 51/2001 of 30 December 2001), the right to strike of workers occupying jobs essential to the maintenance of the safety of persons and property, and workers occupying jobs in which any stoppage would endanger human life and safety, is exercised according to the procedures laid down by order of the minister responsible for labour issues. It requested the Government to provide a copy of this order. In its report, the Government indicates that the order is being prepared, but has not yet been issued. The Committee requests the Government to provide a copy of the Decree as soon as it is adopted so that it can assess its conformity with the Convention.

2. The Committee also previously requested the Government to indicate the nature of the penalties incurred by workers against whom legal action is taken by their employer under section 190 of the Labour Code, which allows an employer to take legal action against workers who have participated in a strike deemed to be illegal by the competent authority. In this respect, the Committee noted the concerns expressed by the Association of Christian Trade Unions (UMURIMO) that it is almost impossible to call a legal strike because the procedure for settling collective disputes, as established by the Labour Code, is very cumbersome and the ministerial order for the establishment of the Conciliation Council provided for in section 183 of the Labour Code has still not been adopted.

In its report, the Government confirms that no court rulings have been issued in cases brought by an employer against a worker for participation in a strike deemed to be illegal by the competent authority. It emphasizes the need to specify the nature of the penalties incurred by strikers in any action taken against them in pursuance of section 190 of the Labour Code and indicates that a solution will be found on the occasion of a future revision of the Labour Code. The Committee notes this information. It also observes that, in its comments on the application of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), it has considered that the juxtaposition of sections 183 and 189 of the Labour Code appears to constitute a form of compulsory arbitration placing excessive restrictions on the right to strike of trade union organizations. In view of these restrictions, a strike could very easily be deemed illegal by the competent authority.

The Committee hopes that, on the occasion of the revision of the Labour Code referred to by the Government, the question of the penalties incurred as a result of action taken against workers under section 190 of the Labour Code, will be examined in the light of Article 1(d) of the Convention, under which no form of forced labour, including compulsory prison labour, may be imposed as a punishment for having participated in strikes.

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

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Imposition of sentences of imprisonment involving the obligation to work as punishment for expressing political views or views that are ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, under section 9(1) and (2) of Act No. 33/91 of 5 August 1991 respecting demonstrations on public thoroughfares and public meetings, any person who organizes an unauthorized demonstration or meeting shall be liable to a sentence of imprisonment. Furthermore, under section 39 of the Penal Code and section 40 of Ordinance No. 111/127 of 20 May 1961 on the organization of the prison system, work is compulsory for all convicted prisoners. The Committee recalled that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits recourse to any form of forced or compulsory labour, including compulsory labour in prison, as a means of political coercion or education or as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It requested the Government to ensure that persons who hold or express, by means of methods that neither use violence nor incite to violence, an opinion opposed to the established political, social or economic system do not incur prison sentences involving the obligation to work.

In its last report, the Government indicates that the amendment of these legal texts was recommended at the seminar on international labour standards held in December 2003. The drafting of texts for their amendment is at an advanced stage, particularly the Bill to amend Ordinance No. 111/127 on the organization of the prison system, which is being examined by the National Assembly. The Committee notes this information. The Committee hopes that, in the context of the process of the amendment of the legislation, the Government will take the necessary measures to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention and to amend section 9 of Act No. 33/91 so as to ensure that persons who express certain political views or who express their ideological opposition to the political, social or economic system by organizing meetings or demonstrations, without recourse to violence, cannot incur sentences of imprisonment involving the obligation to work. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures adopted for this purpose and to supply a copy of any text that is adopted.

The Committee also is addressing a request directly to the Government on certain matters.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

Article 1(a) of the Convention. The Committee recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the recourse to forced or compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, under section 39 of the Penal Code and section 40 of Ordinance No. 111/127 of 20 May 1961 concerning the prison system, work is compulsory for all convicted prisoners. It requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of sections 166 and 167 of the Penal Code, under which any person who makes use of the spoken, written or printed word to incite or attempt to incite the general public against the authorities or to alarm the general public, or any person who impugns the binding force of the law, shall be liable to imprisonment. This request was made to enable the Committee to evaluate the scope of these provisions in relation to the situations covered by the Convention. In its last report, the Government stated that copies of the court decisions issued under sections 166 and 167 of the Penal Code would be provided subsequently, as a separate communication from the report sent in September 2003. The Committee notes with regret that copies of the court decisions have still not been received at the Office. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide copies of the court decisions and information on the application in practice of sections 166 and 167 of the Penal Code defining or illustrating their scope, so as to enable the Committee to ascertain that the holding or expression of certain political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system without recourse to violence is not punished by imprisonment including compulsory labour.

In this context, the Committee notes Act No. 18/2002 of 11 May 2002 concerning the press and Organic Act No. 16/2003 of 27 June 2003 concerning political groupings and politicians. In view of the abovementioned developments, the Committee would also be grateful if the Government would provide information on the practical application, and copies if appropriate, of the court decisions relating to the following provisions:

-  section 83 of Act No. 18/2002 concerning the press, under which any person who by means of the press incites a third party to commit crimes or offences punishable by the Penal Code shall be deemed an accomplice and liable to the penalties laid down by the said Code if such incitement has repercussions or results in an attempted crime or offence (taking account of the abovementioned sections 166 and 167 of the Penal Code).

-  section 46 of Act No. 16/2003 concerning political groupings and politicians, under which, without prejudice to the penal provisions, any person who establishes or runs a political grouping in violation of the legislation shall be liable to imprisonment of six months to two years and a fine of 500,000 to 1,000,000 Rwandan francs or either of these two penalties, and any person who runs or participates in a political grouping which continues to operate after being suspended or a political grouping which is reconstituted after being dissolved shall be liable to the same penalties.

Article 1(c). For many years the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to section 29 of the Decree of 1 April 1983 establishing articles of agreement for inland navigation and sections 13 and 14 of the Decree of 11 May 1921 establishing the disciplinary and penal code for inland navigation, which are contrary to this provision of the Convention inasmuch as they allow prison sentences including compulsory labour to be imposed on sailors for breaches of discipline. In this regard, the Government stated in its report sent in 1999 that no cases involving the imprisonment of sailors for breaches of discipline had occurred, given the virtually non-existent traffic on Lake Kivu. While noting that the Government states that it takes note of its comments, the Committee hopes that, the next time the legislation on this subject is amended, the Government will be able to take the necessary measures to amend the abovementioned provisions in order to ensure that no prison sentence including compulsory labour can be imposed on sailors for breaches of discipline. The Committee meanwhile requests the Government to send a copy, where appropriate, of any legal court decisions issued pursuant to these provisions.

Article 1(d). In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, under section 191 of the Labour Code (Act No. 51/2001 of 30 December 2001), the right to strike of workers occupying jobs essential to the maintenance of the safety of persons and property and workers occupying jobs in which any stoppage would endanger human life and safety is exercised according to the procedures laid down by order of the minister responsible for labour issues. In addition, section 190 of the Labour Code allows an employer to take legal action against workers who have taken part in a strike deemed to be illegal by the competent authority. The Committee requested the Government to indicate the nature of the penalties incurred by workers against whom legal action had been taken by their employer, under section 190 of the Labour Code, and to send a copy of the Order governing the implementation of section 191.

In its last report, the Government indicates that the Order governing the implementation of section 191 of the Labour Code is being drawn up and that no court decisions has been issued further to any action taken by an employer against workers who have taken part in a strike deemed to be illegal by the competent authority. The Committee notes this information. It also notes that the Association of Christian Trade Unions (UMURIMO), in its comments transmitted to the Government on 13 January 2004, expresses its concern at the fact that it is almost impossible to carry out a legal strike because the procedure for settling collective disputes laid down in the Labour Code is extremely cumbersome and the ministerial order for the setting up of the Conciliation Council provided for in section 183 of the Labour Code has not yet been adopted. The Committee recalls that it requested the Government, in its comments on the application of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), to provide information on the circumstances in which workers could legally go on strike in practice, in view of the provisions of the Labour Code relating to the procedure for the settlement of collective disputes (section 183 read in conjunction with section 189). The Committee therefore again requests the Government to indicate the penalties incurred by strikers as a result of action taken against them under to section 190 of the Labour Code and to send a copy of the relevant court decisions. Please also send a copy of the Order establishing the procedures to be followed by workers exercising the right to strike referred to by section 191 of the Labour Code.

The Committee notes that article 35 of the Constitution guarantees freedom of association which is to be exercised under the conditions prescribed by law. It once again requests the Government to send a copy of the legislation regulating the exercise of freedom of association.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

Article 1(a) of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, under section 9(1) and (2) of Act No. 33/91 of 5 August 1991 concerning demonstrations on public thoroughfares and public meetings, any person who organizes an unauthorized demonstration or meeting shall be liable to a sentence of imprisonment. Also noting that, under section 39 of the Penal Code and section 40 of Ordinance No. 111/127 of 20 May 1961 concerning the prison system, work is compulsory for all convicted prisoners, the Committee requested the Government to ensure that persons who hold or express - by means or methods that neither use violence nor incite to violence - an opinion opposed to the established political, social or economic system do not incur prison sentences including the obligation to work. In its last report the Government indicated that a seminar on international labour standards was due to take place, and that on this occasion the comments of the Committee of Experts would be examined so that a reply could be made to them. The Committee hopes that, further to this seminar, appropriate measures will have been taken to ensure the respect of Article 1(a) of the Convention, which prohibits the recourse to any form of forced or compulsory labour, including compulsory labour in prison, as a means of political coercion or education or as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system.

The Committee is also addressing a request regarding certain points directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes the Government’s reports.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. 1. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice, including judicial decisions, of certain provisions of the Penal Code under which any person who makes use of the spoken, written or printed word to incite or attempt to incite the population against the public authorities or to alarm the population (section 166), and any person who impugns the binding force of the law (section 167), shall be punished by imprisonment. The Committee notes the Government’s statement in its report that copies of judgements issued under sections 166 and 167 of the Penal Code will be provided as soon as possible.

The Committee trusts that copies of the above judgements will be forwarded to the Office as soon as possible.

Article 1(c). 2. The Committee has been referring for several years to the Decree of 1 April 1983 regulating contracts of engagement in work on river navigation and the Decree of 11 May 1921 issuing the Disciplinary and Penal Code for River Navigation, which allow the imposition of prison sentences on boat hands for breaches of labour discipline. The Committee had previously noted the information provided by the Government to the effect that there had been no cases of imprisonment of boat hands for breaches of discipline. The Committee notes the Government’s statement in its previous report that it has taken due note of the Committee’s comments requesting the amendment of the Decrees of 1 April 1983 and 11 May 1921. However, it notes that no steps have been taken to this effect.

The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to take all the necessary measures to ensure that no sentence involving the obligation to work can be imposed on boat hands in cases of breaches of labour discipline.

Article 1(d). 3. The Committee notes section 191 of Act No. 51/2001 issuing the Labour Code, which provides that the right to strike of "workers in posts that are indispensable for the safety of the population and property, and workers in jobs the stoppage of which would jeopardize safety and human lives" shall be exercised in accordance with specific procedures determined by order. The Committee also notes that section 190 of the Labour Code provides for penalties for any strike called illegally. Section 190 provides that employers may take action in the courts against workers who have participated in a strike considered to be illegal by the competent authority.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate the penalties incurred by workers against whom action is taken in the courts by employers, and to provide copies of the Order governing the modalities for the application of section 191 of the Labour Code.

4. The Committee requests the Government to provide copies of the following texts once they have been adopted:

-  the Act establishing the Rwandan Defence Forces (adopted by the Transitional National Assembly on 12 April 2002);

-  the Press Act (adopted by the Transitional National Assembly on 28 September 2001);

-  the new general conditions of service of State officials;

-  Act No. 40/2000 of 26 January 2001 establishing "gacaca jurisdictions" and organizing judicial action in the case of violations constituting crimes of genocide or crimes against humanity, and the implementing provisions respecting work of general interest; and

-  the Act respecting freedom of association.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes the Government’s reports.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. In its previous comment, the Committee noted section 9(1) and (2) of Act No. 33/91 of 5 August 1991, with respect to demonstrations on public thoroughfares and public meetings, under which any person who organizes an unauthorized demonstration or meeting shall be liable to a sentence of imprisonment. The Committee notes that, in accordance with section 39 of the Penal Code and section 40 of Ordinance No. 111/127, of 20 May 1961, with respect to prison organization, work is compulsory for all convicted prisoners. The Committee also noted that, according to the Government’s report, any person who expresses their political, social or economic opinions may be convicted to sentences involving the obligation to work as a punishment in the event of failure to comply with the provisions of Act No. 33/91.

The Committee requested the Government to ensure that persons who hold or express - by means or methods that neither use violence nor incite to violence - an opinion opposed to the establish political, social or economic system do not incur sentences involving penalties, in contravention of the Convention. In this respect, it notes that according to its latest report the Government has taken due note of the Committee’s comments, but states that no amendment has been made to the legislative texts. The Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures as soon as possible to ensure the application of the Convention on this point.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

The Committee notes the Government's report.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. 1. The Committee had asked the Government to supply information on the practical application -- including judicial decisions -- of certain provisions of the Penal Code under which any person who makes use of the spoken, written or printed word to incite or attempt to incite the population against the public authorities or to alarm the population (section 166) and any person who impugns the binding force of the law (section 167) shall be punished by imprisonment. The Committee had noted the earlier statement by the Government that decisions had been handed down under section 166. It notes that the Government did not supply a copy of the said judgements with its latest report.

So as to be able to appreciate the scope of the abovementioned provisions in respect of the Convention, the Committee again requests the Government to supply the information requested on the practical application of sections 166 and 167 of the Penal Code.

Article 1(b). 2. In its earlier comments, the Committee had asked the Government to supply practical information on the functioning and organization of the community development work known as "umuganda", in particular on the participation of the populations concerned, firstly, in the elaboration of work programmes and, secondly, in decisions concerning occasions for and the characteristics of such work. The Committee had noted the earlier statements of the Government that "umuganda" was conceived and carried out locally and voluntarily in the interest of a given local community.

The Committee notes with interest the information supplied by the Government on Presidential Order No. 37/01 of 23 December 1998 regulating community development work. It takes note of the new details supplied by the Government on the length of the work -- once a month, for between two and four hours -- and on its nature; clearance work, construction or repair of primary schools, or other work of local interest. On the participation of populations, the Government explains that the work is organized on the basis of Cells, that is to say the smallest territorial unit of the country. The administrative methods and division of authority between the directing bodies of the Cell bear witness to the populations' close involvement in the elaboration of the work, and in decisions on the occasions for and characteristics of the work. In fact, the Cell Council (composed of all inhabitants aged over 18) is obliged to meet once a month to define the broad outline of the programme of activities, which are implemented by the Executive Committee (composed of ten elected members). The Committee requests the Government to supply a copy of Presidential Order No. 37/01 of 23 December 1998.

3. In its previous comments, the Committee had referred to Presidential Order No. 234/06 of 21 October 1975 establishing re-education and production centres, and to the Government's indication, that firstly, the inmates of these centres are people without "papers", who have no work and who are picked up by law enforcement services in the towns, and secondly, that the centres are places where these persons may be trained, to facilitate their reintegration in society. It had requested the Government to specify under what legislation the persons concerned are arrested by the police and sent to the centres in question, and to supply copies of the relevant texts.

The Committee takes due note of the Government's statement in its report that the text currently in force on vagrancy and begging under which the re-education and production centres were established by Presidential Decree No. 234/06 of 21 October 1975, is the Decree of 23 May 1896, as amended by the Decrees of 11 July 1923 and 6 June 1958. It notes however that no copy of the Decree or of the text amending it have been transmitted. The Committee expresses the hope that the Government will supply copies of the abovementioned texts with its next report.

Article 1(c). 4. The Committee has referred for a number of years to the Decree of 1 April 1983 to regulate contracts of engagement to work in river navigation and the Decree of 11 May 1921 establishing the disciplinary and Penal Code for river navigation which allow the imposition of prison sentences on seafarers for breaches of discipline, and asked for information on the measures taken to ensure respect of the Convention on this point.

In its last report, the Government indicated that as yet there were no cases of imprisonment of seafarers in breach of discipline in view of the near insignificant traffic on lake Kivu, and that it was not an opportune moment to envisage any measures in respect of a situation which did not in fact merit consideration.

The Committee notes this information. However it hopes, to ensure respect for the Convention on this point, that the Government will incorporate the practice into the legislation, by amending the Decrees of 1 April 1983 and 11 May 1921 so that no sentences involving the obligation to work may be imposed on seafarers in breach of discipline at work.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

The Committee notes the Government's report as well as the copy of the Act annexed thereto.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that Order No. RV111/29, regarding demonstrations in the streets and public meetings, establishes under its section 8, that any person who has organized or participated in an unauthorized demonstration or meeting shall be liable to penal servitude including, by virtue of sections 39 of the Penal Code and 40 of Order No. 111/127 of 30 May 1961, regarding prison organization, compulsory labour.

The Government had previously indicated that the provision in question had been repealed by Act No. 33/91 of 5 August 1991. Having noted this Act, the Committee observes with regret that, under section 9, prison sentences involving forced labour are still provided for in cases where persons organize a demonstration or an assembly without giving prior notice or obtaining the authorization of the authorities. It also notes with regret the information contained in the Government's latest report that "persons who express certain political opinions or display ideological opposition to the established political, social or economic order, may incur penalties of forced or compulsory labour under the provisions of Act No. 33/91 of 5 August 1991 respecting demonstrations in the street and public meetings, without prejudice to the provisions of the Penal Code, and in particular sections 166 and 167".

Referring to the explanations provided in paragraphs 133-140 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour, the Committee recalls that, where penalties involving compulsory labour are used to enforce a prohibition to express views or opposition to the established political, social or economic system (above all where there is no incitement to violence or use of violent methods), this is not in conformity with the Convention, whether such prohibition is imposed directly by law or by a discretionary administrative decision.

The Committee urges the Government to take the measures necessary to ensure that persons who hold or express - by means or methods that neither use violence nor incite to violence - an opinion opposed to the established political, social or economic system do not incur sentences involving penalties in contravention to the Convention. It requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged in this regard.

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

Article 1(a) of the Convention. 1. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, according to the Government's information, Order No. 111/29 respecting demonstrations in the streets and public meetings had been repealed and a new Act adopted. The Government indicates in its last report, which was received in November 1997, that Order No. 111/29 was repealed by Act No. 33/91 of 5 August 1991 respecting demonstrations in the streets and public meetings. Since the text of the new Act was not attached to the report, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide a copy with its next report.

2. In its previous comments, the Committee also referred to sections 166 and 167 of the Penal Code under which penalties of imprisonment for up to two years can be imposed for activities against the established authorities. Penalties of imprisonment involve the obligation to work under the terms of section 39 of the Penal Code and section 40 of Ordinance No. 111/127 respecting the prison service. The Committee notes that the Government's report received in November 1997 does not contain the information, including information on any relevant court decisions, which the Committee had requested concerning the application in practice of sections 166 and 167 of the Penal Code. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to provide the information requested with its next report to ensure that the Convention is respected.

Article 1(b). 3. In its previous comments, the Committee had referred to community development work (umuganda). It had noted that such work was not covered by the relevant texts and that, according to the Government, it was done at the people's initiative for the benefit of the community, which itself decided on the priority tasks. The Government indicates in its last report that community development work is devised and carried out locally, voluntarily and strictly in the interests of a given local community. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide in its next report information on the participation of the communities themselves in drawing up work programmes and in any decision-making concerning the suitability and the nature of the work to be done.

4. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the information concerning re-education and production centres set up under Presidential Order No. 234/06 of 21 October 1975. It noted the Government's information to the effect that the inmates of such centres are people without "papers" who are picked up by law-enforcement services in the towns. The Government indicates that the re-education centres should not be confused with prisons, and that the centres in question are establishments where people who have missed out on education receive a training and education which enables them to become reintegrated into society. The Committee again requests the Government to provide copies of the relevant texts. It also requests the Government to specify under what legislation the persons concerned are arrested by the police and sent to the centres in question.

Article 1(c). 5. The Committee notes that the Government has not provided the information requested by the Committee on the measures taken to ensure respect for the Convention with regard to sentences of imprisonment imposed upon sailors for breaches of discipline under the Decree of 1 April 1983 to regulate contracts of engagement to work in river navigation and the Decree of 11 May 1921 establishing the disciplinary and penal code for river navigation. The Committee trusts that such measures will be taken in the near future and that the Government will provide information on any such measures.

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

Article 1(a) of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee noted, from the information supplied by the Government, that Ordinance No. 111/29 respecting demonstrations in the streets and public meetings had been repealed and a new Act adopted. It requested the Government to supply the text of the new Act.

The Committee notes that the Government's report contains no information on this matter. It hopes that the Government will provide the information requested with its next report.

The Committee also referred to sections 166 and 167 of the Penal Code, under which penalties of imprisonment for up to two years can be imposed for activities against the established authorities. Penalties of imprisonment involve the obligation to work under the terms of section 39 of the Penal Code and section 40 of Ordinance No. 111/127 respecting the prison service.

The Committee notes that the Government has not supplied the information requested by the Committee on the effect given in practice, including court decisions, to sections 166 and 167 of the Penal Code, in order to enable it to examine the scope of these provisions.

The Committee requests the Government to provide the information requested with its next report so that it is able to verify the observance of the Convention.

The Committee notes that the Government has not supplied the information requested by the Committee on:

- community development work (umuganda);

- the re-education and production centres set up under Presidential Order No. 234/06;

- the measures taken to ensure observance of the Convention with regard to the sentences of imprisonment imposed upon sailors for breaches of discipline.

The Committee hopes that the Government will supply all of the above information in its next report.

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

The Committee notes that no report has been received from the Government. 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:

With reference to its observation under this Convention and the information supplied by the Government in its report, the Committee previously noted that section 29 of the Constitution of 1991 provides that extra-penal forced labour is prohibited. It also notes that, by virtue of section 98 of the Constitution, the legislation remains in force unless it is amended, repealed or replaced by new laws or regulations.

In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that, in accordance with section 39 of the Penal Code and section 40 of Ordinance No. 111/127 of 30 May 1961 to organize the prison service in Rwanda, imprisonment involves the obligation to work. The Committee recalls that compulsory labour in any form, including compulsory prison labour, is covered by Convention No. 105 in so far as it is exacted in any of the five cases specified by the Convention.

Article 1(a) of the Convention

1. The Committee notes the Government's statement in its report for 1990-91 that Ordinance RV No. 111/29 respecting demonstrations in the streets and public meetings has been repealed and a new Act adopted.

The Committee requests the Government to supply the text of the Act in question and to provide full information on its application in practice.

The Committee requested the Government to supply information on the effect given in practice, including court decisions, defining or illustrating the scope of section 166 (which renders liable to imprisonment any person who makes use of the spoken, written or printed word to incite the population against the public authorities or to alarm the population).

In this respect, the Committee had noted the Government's statement that decisions have been handed down under section 166, but that it was not possible to supply copies of them. The Committee hopes that the Government will be able to supply copies of these decisions.

With regard to section 167 (which renders liable to imprisonment any person who impugns the binding force of the law), the Committee also notes that, according to the Government, no case of its application has been recorded up to now.

Article 1(b)

2. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to community development work. It noted that this work, known as "umuganda", is not covered by any legal texts and that, according to the Government's statements, is undertaken at the initiative of the people and benefits the whole community, which determines the most important tasks to be performed.

The Committee notes the Government's statement that the current political situation has resulted in the institutionalization of community development work being taken off the agenda for the time being.

In earlier comments, the Committee noted the statements made by a government representative to the effect that the work in question involves tasks such as the planting of trees for firewood, the laying of water-pipes and electricity cables and the planting of coffee, and that citizens are called upon once a week to perform these tasks.

The Committee once again requests the Government to supply practical information on the above work, and in particular on the participation of the populations concerned in the elaboration of programmes and decisions relating to the priorities and characteristics of such work.

3. The Committee had noted that the re-education and production centres set up under Presidential Order No. 234-06 of 21 October 1975 are three in number, according to the Government's information, and that they accommodate approximately 450 persons, who are taught to organize themselves and to be productive, in particular by working in fields, and that these centres are intended to cope with vagrancy.

The Committee had noted the Government's statement that the persons accommodated in these centres have neither documents nor work and are picked up by the security forces in towns. Since the State does not have sufficient resources to pay for them, these persons contribute to their own maintenance through their work in agriculture or crafts.

The texts governing these centres, to which the Government referred, were not attached to the report. The Committee therefore requests the Government to supply copies of them. It also requests the Government to state the legal provisions under which the persons concerned are arrested by the police and sent to the centres in question.

Article 1(c)

The Committee noted previously that under section 29 of the Decree of 1 April 1983 to regulate contracts of engagement to work in river navigation, any worker so engaged is liable to imprisonment if, in the fulfilment of his contract of employment, he fails to comply with any obligations imposed by decree, by agreement or by custom. It also noted that under the terms of sections 13 and 14 of the Decree of 11 May 1921 establishing the disciplinary and penal code for river navigation, infringements in the form of repeated breaches of discipline, such as negligence, laziness and unwillingness to carry out orders, lack of respect towards superiors, absence without permission, smuggling aboard hemp or alcoholic beverages, insulting the captain or flat refusal to obey orders to assist in manoeuvring the vessel or keep it tidy are punishable by imprisonment.

Referring to paragraphs 117 and 118 of its 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the measures that have been taken or are contemplated to ensure that the Convention is applied in this respect.

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

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It must, therefore, repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

The Committee notes the new Constitution of 30 March 1991 which guarantees, inter alia, multipartism (section 7) and freedom of association (section 19). The Committee hopes that during any process of revising the legislation, the Government will take into account the Committee's comments concerning a number of provisions to which it refers in a request addressed directly to the Government and that it will supply information on the measures that have been taken or are envisaged to bring the legislation into full conformity with the requirements of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

With reference to its observation under this Convention and the information supplied by the Government in its report, the Committee notes that section 29 of the Constitution of 1991 provides that extra-penal forced labour is prohibited. It also notes that, by virtue of section 98 of the Constitution, the legislation remains in force unless it is amended, repealed or replaced by new laws or regulations.

In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that, in accordance with section 39 of the Penal Code and section 40 of Ordinance No. 111/127 of 30 May 1961 to organise the prison service in Rwanda, imprisonment involves the obligation to work. The Committee recalls that compulsory labour in any form, including compulsory prison labour, is covered by Convention No. 105 in so far as it is exacted in any of the five cases specified by the Convention.

Article 1(a) of the Convention

1. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest the Government's statement that, due to the adoption of the Constitution of 1991 and the repeal of section 7 of the former Constitution, organisations which were previously members of the single party have the freedom to choose whether to remain in or leave this political association.

The Committee notes the Edict of 25 April 1962 respecting associations, which was supplied by the Government. It also notes with interest Act No. 28-91 of 18 June 1991 on political parties.

2. The Committee notes the Government's statement that Ordinance RV No. 111/29 respecting demonstrations in the streets and public meetings has been repealed and a new Act adopted.

The Committee requests the Government to supply the text of the Act in question and to provide full information on its application in practice.

The Committee requested the Government to supply information on the effect given in practice, including court decisions, defining or illustrating the scope of section 166 (which renders liable to imprisonment any person who makes use of the spoken, written or printed word to incite the population against the public authorities or to alarm the population).

In this respect, the Committee notes the Government's statement that decisions have been handed down under section 166, but that it was not possible to supply copies of them. The Committee hopes that the Government will be able to supply copies of these decisions.

With regard to section 167 (which renders liable to imprisonment any person who impunes the binding force of the law), the Committee also notes that, according to the Government, no case of its application has been recorded up to now.

Article 1(b)

3. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to community development work. It noted that this work, known as "umuganda", is not covered by any legal texts and that, according to the Government's statements, is undertaken at the initiative of the people and benefits the whole community, which determines the most important tasks to be performed.

The Committee notes the Government's statement that the current political situation has resulted in the institutionalisation of community development work being taken off the agenda for the time being.

In earlier comments, the Committee noted the statements made by a government representative to the effect that the work in question involves tasks such as the planting of trees for firewood, the laying of water-pipes and electricity cables and the planting of coffee, and that citizens are called upon once a week to perform these tasks.

The Committee once again requests the Government to supply practical information on the above work, and in particular on the participation of the populations concerned in the elaboration of programmes and decisions relating to the priorities and characteristics of such work.

4. The Committee noted that the re-education and production centres set up under Presidential Order No. 234-06 of 21 October 1975 are three in number, according to the Government's information, and that they accommodate approximately 450 persons, who are taught to organise themselves and to be productive, in particular by working in fields, and that these centres are intended to cope with vagrancy.

The Committee notes the Government's statement that the persons accommodated in these centres have neither documents nor work and are picked up by the security forces in towns. Since the State does not have sufficient resources to pay for them, these persons contribute to their own maintenance through their work in agriculture or crafts.

The texts governing these centres, to which the Government referred, were not attached to the report. The Committee therefore requests the Government to supply copies of them. It also requests the Government to state the legal provisions under which the persons concerned are arrested by the police and sent to the centres in question.

Article 1(c). The Committee noted previously that under section 29 of the Decree of 1 April 1983 to regulate contracts of engagement to work in river navigation, any worker so engaged is liable to imprisonment if, in the fulfilment of his contract of employment, he fails to comply with any obligations imposed by decree, by agreement or by custom. It also noted that under the terms of sections 13 and 14 of the Decree of 11 May 1921 establishing the disciplinary and penal code for river navigation, infringements in the form of repeated breaches of discipline, such as negligence, laziness and unwillingness to carry out orders, lack of respect towards superiors, absence without permission, smuggling aboard hemp or alcoholic beverages, insulting the captain or flat refusal to obey orders to assist in manoeuvring the vessel or keep it tidy are punishable by imprisonment.

Referring to paragraphs 117 and 118 of its 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the measures that have been taken or are contemplated to ensure that the Convention is applied in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

The Committee notes with interest the new Constitution of 30 March 1991 which guarantees, inter alia, multipartism (section 7) and freedom of association (section 19). The Committee hopes that during any process of revising the legislation, the Government will take into account the Committee's comments concerning a number of provisions to which it refers in a request addressed directly to the Government and that it will supply information on the measures that have been taken or are envisaged to bring the legislation into full conformity with the requirements of the Convention.

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

The Committee notes the Government's indications that the Penal Code established by Legislative Decree No. 21/77 of 18 August 1977 replaces "penal servitude" by imprisonment as the penalty whereby offenders are deprived of liberty. The Committee notes that, under section 29 of the Penal Code and section 40 of Ordinance No. 111/127 of 30 May 1961 to organise the prison service in Rwanda, imprisonment involves the obligation to work. The Committee refers to the explanations in paragraphs 102 to 110 of its General Survey of 1977 on forced labour, and recalls that compulsory labour in any form, including compulsory prison labour, is covered by the Convention in so far as it is exacted in the five cases specified by the Convention.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. 1. The Committee noted previously that under article 7 of the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda, the Rwandese people are politically organised within the National Revolutionary Movement for Development (the sole political party), and that under article 19, freedom of association is guaranteed under conditions to be prescribed by law and may not be made subject to prior authorisation.

The Committee notes the Government's indications concerning the complementarity of these provisions with article 65 of the statutes of the National Revolutionary Movement for Development which provides that the Movement may establish bodies to implement specific programmes and may promote organisations which are an integral part of the Movement, at the level of all social or cultural groups. The structure, composition and operation of these organisations must be approved by the Movement. The Committee asks the Government to provide a copy of these statutes and of the provisions of the decree of 25 April 1962 concerning non-profit associations.

2. The Committee noted previously that Ordinance R.V. No. 111/29 regarding demonstrations in public thoroughfares and public meetings provides for a system of prior authorisation in accordance with article 20 of the Constitution, and that section 8 of this Ordinance provides that any person who has organised or participated in an unauthorised demonstration or meeting shall be liable to imprisonment. The Committee notes the Government's indications that the criteria used in granting or refusing authorisations are left to the discretion of the competent authority, which shall judge whether a demonstration or public meeting is prejudicial to the public order. The Committee hopes that the Government will be able to provide information on the practical application of these provisions, including examples of unauthorised demonstrations or meetings, indicating any penalties that may have been imposed.

The Committee hopes that the Government will also be able to provide information on the application, in practice, of the following sections of the Penal Code, including any decision by a court of law defining or illustrating their scope: section 66 (which renders liable to imprisonment any person who makes use of the spoken, written or printed word to incite the population against the public authorities, or alarm the population) and section 167 (which renders liable to imprisonment any person who impugns the binding force of the law).

Article 1(b). 3. In earlier comments, the Committee noted the statements made by a government representative to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights when it was examining the report of the Government of Rwanda concerning the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (15th Session, 348th meeting), to the effect that once a week everyone goes to work in the fields and on the roads for the benefit of the State, citizens performing such tasks as the planting of trees for firewood, the laying of water-pipes and electricity cables and the planting of coffee.

The Committee notes the Government's indications that there is no legislation on community development work. Such work, known as "Umuganda", is undertaken at the initiative of the people and benefits the whole community which determines the most important tasks to be performed. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on concrete tasks performed in this context, in particular on the participation of the populations concerned in the elaboration of programmes and decisions relating to the opportunity and characteristics of such work.

4. The Committee requested the Government to supply information on the operation of the Re-education and Production Centres set up under Presidential Order No. 234/06 of 21 October 1975, and in particular on the number and status of the persons placed at the disposal of the Government in these centres, as well as on the nature and extent of the work they are called upon to perform.

The Committee takes note of the information supplied by the Government to the effect that there are three such centres, which were created to cope with vagrancy, and accommodate approximately 450 persons who are taught to organise themselves and to be productive, in particular through working in fields placed at their disposal. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether admission to, and work in these centres are voluntary, and to supply copies of provisions governing these matters.

Article 1(c). The Committee noted previously that under section 29 of the Decree of 1 April 1983 to regulate contracts of engagement to work in river navigation, any worker so engaged is liable to imprisonment if, in the fulfilment of his contract of employment, he fails to comply with any obligations imposed by decree, by agreement or by custom. It also noted that under the terms of sections 13 and 14 of the Decree of 11 May 1921 establishing the disciplinary and penal code for river navigation, infringements in the form of repeated breaches of discipline, such as negligence, laziness and unwillingness to carry out orders, lack of respect towards superiors, absence without permission, smuggling aboard hemp or alcoholic beverages, insulting the captain or flat refusal to obey orders to assist in manoeuvring the vessel or keeping it tidy are punishable by imprisonment.

Referring to paragraphs 117 and 118 of its General Survey of 1979 on the abolition of forced labour, The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated to ensure that the Convention is applied in this respect.