Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Tajikistan (Ratification: 1993)

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

Previous comment

Article 3. Right of organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee had previously noted that pursuant to section 323(2) of the Labour Code, a decision to declare a strike should be taken by a meeting of workers or of an appropriate workers’ representative body and that such a decision should be adopted by not less than two thirds of those present at the meeting (representative body) or two thirds of the delegates to the conference of workers’ representatives. The Committee considered that requiring a decision by two thirds of those present at the meeting was excessive and requested the Government to amend this provision so as to lower the majority required for the calling of a strike. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that this proposal was carefully considered by specialists with the participation of trade union representatives. According to the Government, there is no need to reduce the above requirement as it corresponds to the rules and regulations set out in trade union statutes, according to which, trade union conferences and congresses are considered legitimate with the participation of at least two thirds of delegates. The Committee considers that requiring a decision by two thirds of those present at the meeting could unduly hinder the possibility of calling a strike and once again it requests the Government to amend section 323(2) of the Labour Code. It requests the Government to provide information on all measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

The Committee had previously noted that pursuant to section 323(5) of the Labour Code, the right to strike can be restricted by legislation in cases where it might endanger the life and health of individuals or the security and defence capacity of the State and requested the Government to indicate services where the right to strike was so restricted or prohibited, with reference to the relevant legislative provisions. The Committee notes that the Government points out that restrictions and prohibitions on participation in strikes are established by law and only for the purpose of national security in specific sectors, and refers in this respect to the following examples: the Law on a State of Emergency prohibits strikes in specific circumstances of a state of emergency; the Law on the Status of Military Personnel (section 6) and the Law on the Police (section 20) prohibit military personnel and police officers from organizing and participating in strikes; the Customs Code (section 484) and the Civil Service Act (section 30) prohibit customs officials and civil servants from taking part in strikes that may disrupt the functioning of state bodies and impede the performance of official duties. The Committee understands the national security examples identified, and also understands that the restrictions under the Civil Service Act apply to public servants exercising authority in the name of the State. While taking due note of these examples, the Committee requests the Government to provide an exhaustive list of services where strikes are restricted or prohibited.

The Committee recalls that it had requested the Government to indicate whether alternative compensatory guarantees were afforded to workers deprived of their right to strike pursuant to section 323(5) of the Labour Code and to indicate the applicable legislative provisions. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the national legislation does not provide for compensatory guarantees and payments to employees whose right to strike is restricted or prohibited. The Committee once again recalls that when the right to strike is restricted or prohibited in certain enterprises or services considered essential, or for certain public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, the workers should be afforded adequate protection so as to compensate for the restrictions imposed on their freedom of action. Such protection should include, for example, impartial conciliation and eventually arbitration procedures which have the confidence of the parties, in which workers and their organizations could be associated. Such arbitration awards should be binding on both parties and once issued should be implemented rapidly and completely. The Committee requests the Government to review its legislation with a view to ensuring that procedures such as conciliation, and eventually arbitration, exist and can be used by the above-mentioned categories of workers. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on measures taken or envisaged to that end.

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

The Committee notes with concern 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

The Committee notes the observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) received on 1 September 2015, which are of a general nature. The Committee notes the entry into force of the new Law on Trade Unions (2011) and the new Labour Code (2016). The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that the Law on Public Associations does not apply to trade unions.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee notes that pursuant to section 323(2) of the Labour Code, a decision to declare a strike should be taken by a meeting of workers or of an appropriate workers’ representative body. Such a decision should be adopted by not less than two thirds of those present at the meeting (representative body) or two thirds of the delegates to the conference of workers’ representatives. The Committee considers that requiring a decision by two thirds of those present at the meeting is excessive and could unduly hinder the possibility of calling a strike.The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend this provision so as to lower the majority required for the calling of a strike. It requests the Government to indicate all measures taken in this respect.

The Committee notes that, pursuant to section 323(5) of the Labour Code, the right to strike can be restricted by legislation in cases where it might endanger the life and health of individuals or the security and defence capacity of the State.The Committee requests the Government to indicate services where the right to strike is so restricted or prohibited, with reference to the relevant legislative provisions.

The Committee recalls that when the right to strike is restricted or prohibited in certain enterprises or services considered essential, or for certain public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, the workers should be afforded adequate protection so as to compensate for the restrictions imposed on their freedom of action. Such protection should include, for example, impartial conciliation and eventually arbitration procedures which have the confidence of the parties, in which workers and their organizations could be associated. Such arbitration awards should be binding on both parties and once issued should be implemented rapidly and completely.The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether alternative compensatory guarantees of this nature are afforded to workers deprived of their right to strike pursuant to section 323(5) of the Labour Code and to indicate the applicable legislative provisions.

Criminal Code. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that under section 160 of the Criminal Code, a violation of procedure for organizing and carrying out meetings, demonstrations and pickets is sanctioned by a fine of up to 2,000 times the minimum wage or of up to two years’ imprisonment. It requested the Government to indicate whether trade unionists had been sanctioned under this provision for exercising legitimate trade union activities. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 160 of the Criminal Code has never been used to prosecute trade unionists for exercising legitimate trade union activities. The Government stresses that participants in peaceful strike action assume no criminal liability and that this provision has not been applied in practice.The Committee takes due note of this information and trusts that this provision will not be used to sanction trade unionists for exercising legitimate trade union activities.

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

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

The Committee notes the observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) received on 1 September 2015, which are of a general nature.

The Committee notes the entry into force of the new Law on Trade Unions (2011) and the new Labour Code (2016). The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that the Law on Public Associations does not apply to trade unions.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee notes that pursuant to section 323(2) of the Labour Code, a decision to declare a strike should be taken by a meeting of workers or of an appropriate workers’ representative body. Such a decision should be adopted by not less than two thirds of those present at the meeting (representative body) or two thirds of the delegates to the conference of workers’ representatives. The Committee considers that requiring a decision by two thirds of those present at the meeting is excessive and could unduly hinder the possibility of calling a strike. The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend this provision so as to lower the majority required for the calling of a strike. It requests the Government to indicate all measures taken in this respect.

The Committee notes that, pursuant to section 323(5) of the Labour Code, the right to strike can be restricted by legislation in cases where it might endanger the life and health of individuals or the security and defence capacity of the State. The Committee requests the Government to indicate services where the right to strike is so restricted or prohibited, with reference to the relevant legislative provisions.

The Committee recalls that when the right to strike is restricted or prohibited in certain enterprises or services considered essential, or for certain public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, the workers should be afforded adequate protection so as to compensate for the restrictions imposed on their freedom of action. Such protection should include, for example, impartial conciliation and eventually arbitration procedures which have the confidence of the parties, in which workers and their organizations could be associated. Such arbitration awards should be binding on both parties and once issued should be implemented rapidly and completely. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether alternative compensatory guarantees of this nature are afforded to workers deprived of their right to strike pursuant to section 323(5) of the Labour Code and to indicate the applicable legislative provisions.

Criminal Code. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that under section 160 of the Criminal Code, a violation of procedure for organizing and carrying out meetings, demonstrations and pickets is sanctioned by a fine of up to 2,000 times the minimum wage or of up to two years’ imprisonment. It requested the Government to indicate whether trade unionists had been sanctioned under this provision for exercising legitimate trade union activities. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 160 of the Criminal Code has never been used to prosecute trade unionists for exercising legitimate trade union activities. The Government stresses that participants in peaceful strike action assume no criminal liability and that this provision has not been applied in practice. The Committee takes due note of this information and trusts that this provision will not be used to sanction trade unionists for exercising legitimate trade union activities.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report contains no reply to its previous comments. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments.

Repetition

The Committee notes the observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) received on 1 September 2015, which are of a general nature.

The Committee notes the entry into force of the new Law on Trade Unions (2011) and the new Labour Code (2016). The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that the Law on Public Associations does not apply to trade unions.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee notes that pursuant to section 323(2) of the Labour Code, a decision to declare a strike should be taken by a meeting of workers or of an appropriate workers’ representative body. Such a decision should be adopted by not less than two thirds of those present at the meeting (representative body) or two thirds of the delegates to the conference of workers’ representatives. The Committee considers that requiring a decision by two thirds of those present at the meeting is excessive and could unduly hinder the possibility of calling a strike. The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend this provision so as to lower the majority required for the calling of a strike. It requests the Government to indicate all measures taken in this respect.

The Committee notes that, pursuant to section 323(5) of the Labour Code, the right to strike can be restricted by legislation in cases where it might endanger the life and health of individuals or the security and defence capacity of the State. The Committee requests the Government to indicate services where the right to strike is so restricted or prohibited, with reference to the relevant legislative provisions.

The Committee recalls that when the right to strike is restricted or prohibited in certain enterprises or services considered essential, or for certain public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, the workers should be afforded adequate protection so as to compensate for the restrictions imposed on their freedom of action. Such protection should include, for example, impartial conciliation and eventually arbitration procedures which have the confidence of the parties, in which workers and their organizations could be associated. Such arbitration awards should be binding on both parties and once issued should be implemented rapidly and completely. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether alternative compensatory guarantees of this nature are afforded to workers deprived of their right to strike pursuant to section 323(5) of the Labour Code and to indicate the applicable legislative provisions.

Criminal Code. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that under section 160 of the Criminal Code, a violation of procedure for organizing and carrying out meetings, demonstrations and pickets is sanctioned by a fine of up to 2,000 times the minimum wage or of up to two years’ imprisonment. It requested the Government to indicate whether trade unionists had been sanctioned under this provision for exercising legitimate trade union activities. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 160 of the Criminal Code has never been used to prosecute trade unionists for exercising legitimate trade union activities. The Government stresses that participants in peaceful strike action assume no criminal liability and that this provision has not been applied in practice. The Committee takes due note of this information and trusts that this provision will not be used to sanction trade unionists for exercising legitimate trade union activities.

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

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

Repetition

The Committee notes the observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) received on 1 September 2015, which are of a general nature.

The Committee notes the entry into force of the new Law on Trade Unions (2011) and the new Labour Code (2016). The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that the Law on Public Associations does not apply to trade unions.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee notes that pursuant to section 323(2) of the Labour Code, a decision to declare a strike should be taken by a meeting of workers or of an appropriate workers’ representative body. Such a decision should be adopted by not less than two-thirds of those present at the meeting (representative body) or two-thirds of the delegates to the conference of workers’ representatives. The Committee considers that requiring a decision by two-thirds of those present at the meeting is excessive and could unduly hinder the possibility of calling a strike. The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend this provision so as to lower the majority required for the calling of a strike. It requests the Government to indicate all measures taken in this respect.

The Committee notes that, pursuant to section 323(5) of the Labour Code, the right to strike can be restricted by legislation in cases where it might endanger the life and health of individuals or the security and defence capacity of the State. The Committee requests the Government to indicate services where the right to strike is so restricted or prohibited, with reference to the relevant legislative provisions.

The Committee recalls that when the right to strike is restricted or prohibited in certain enterprises or services considered essential, or for certain public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, the workers should be afforded adequate protection so as to compensate for the restrictions imposed on their freedom of action. Such protection should include, for example, impartial conciliation and eventually arbitration procedures which have the confidence of the parties, in which workers and their organizations could be associated. Such arbitration awards should be binding on both parties and once issued should be implemented rapidly and completely. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether alternative compensatory guarantees of this nature are afforded to workers deprived of their right to strike pursuant to section 323(5) of the Labour Code and to indicate the applicable legislative provisions.

Criminal Code. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that under section 160 of the Criminal Code, a violation of procedure for organizing and carrying out meetings, demonstrations and pickets is sanctioned by a fine of up to 2,000 times the minimum wage or of up to two years’ imprisonment. It requested the Government to indicate whether trade unionists had been sanctioned under this provision for exercising legitimate trade union activities. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 160 of the Criminal Code has never been used to prosecute trade unionists for exercising legitimate trade union activities. The Government stresses that participants in peaceful strike action assume no criminal liability and that this provision has not been applied in practice. The Committee takes due note of this information and trusts that this provision will not be used to sanction trade unionists for exercising legitimate trade union activities.

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

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 initially made in 2016.

Repetition

The Committee notes the observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) received on 1 September 2015, which are of a general nature.

The Committee notes the entry into force of the new Law on Trade Unions (2011) and the new Labour Code (2016). The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that the Law on Public Associations does not apply to trade unions.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee notes that pursuant to section 323(2) of the Labour Code, a decision to declare a strike should be taken by a meeting of workers or of an appropriate workers’ representative body. Such a decision should be adopted by not less than two-thirds of those present at the meeting (representative body) or two-thirds of the delegates to the conference of workers’ representatives. The Committee considers that requiring a decision by two-thirds of those present at the meeting is excessive and could unduly hinder the possibility of calling a strike. The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend this provision so as to lower the majority required for the calling of a strike. It requests the Government to indicate all measures taken in this respect.

The Committee notes that, pursuant to section 323(5) of the Labour Code, the right to strike can be restricted by legislation in cases where it might endanger the life and health of individuals or the security and defence capacity of the State. The Committee requests the Government to indicate services where the right to strike is so restricted or prohibited, with reference to the relevant legislative provisions.

The Committee recalls that when the right to strike is restricted or prohibited in certain enterprises or services considered essential, or for certain public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, the workers should be afforded adequate protection so as to compensate for the restrictions imposed on their freedom of action. Such protection should include, for example, impartial conciliation and eventually arbitration procedures which have the confidence of the parties, in which workers and their organizations could be associated. Such arbitration awards should be binding on both parties and once issued should be implemented rapidly and completely. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether alternative compensatory guarantees of this nature are afforded to workers deprived of their right to strike pursuant to section 323(5) of the Labour Code and to indicate the applicable legislative provisions.

Criminal Code. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that under section 160 of the Criminal Code, a violation of procedure for organizing and carrying out meetings, demonstrations and pickets is sanctioned by a fine of up to 2,000 times the minimum wage or of up to two years’ imprisonment. It requested the Government to indicate whether trade unionists had been sanctioned under this provision for exercising legitimate trade union activities. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 160 of the Criminal Code has never been used to prosecute trade unionists for exercising legitimate trade union activities. The Government stresses that participants in peaceful strike action assume no criminal liability and that this provision has not been applied in practice. The Committee takes due note of this information and trusts that this provision will not be used to sanction trade unionists for exercising legitimate trade union activities.

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

The Committee notes the observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) received on 1 September 2015, which are of a general nature.

The Committee notes the entry into force of the new Law on Trade Unions (2011) and the new Labour Code (2016). The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that the Law on Public Associations does not apply to trade unions.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee notes that pursuant to section 323(2) of the Labour Code, a decision to declare a strike should be taken by a meeting of workers or of an appropriate workers’ representative body. Such a decision should be adopted by not less than two-thirds of those present at the meeting (representative body) or two-thirds of the delegates to the conference of workers’ representatives. The Committee considers that requiring a decision by two-thirds of those present at the meeting is excessive and could unduly hinder the possibility of calling a strike. The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend this provision so as to lower the majority required for the calling of a strike. It requests the Government to indicate all measures taken in this respect.

The Committee notes that, pursuant to section 323(5) of the Labour Code, the right to strike can be restricted by legislation in cases where it might endanger the life and health of individuals or the security and defence capacity of the State. The Committee requests the Government to indicate services where the right to strike is so restricted or prohibited, with reference to the relevant legislative provisions.

The Committee recalls that when the right to strike is restricted or prohibited in certain enterprises or services considered essential, or for certain public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, the workers should be afforded adequate protection so as to compensate for the restrictions imposed on their freedom of action. Such protection should include, for example, impartial conciliation and eventually arbitration procedures which have the confidence of the parties, in which workers and their organizations could be associated. Such arbitration awards should be binding on both parties and once issued should be implemented rapidly and completely. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether alternative compensatory guarantees of this nature are afforded to workers deprived of their right to strike pursuant to section 323(5) of the Labour Code and to indicate the applicable legislative provisions.

Criminal Code. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that under section 160 of the Criminal Code, a violation of procedure for organizing and carrying out meetings, demonstrations and pickets is sanctioned by a fine of up to 2,000 times the minimum wage or of up to two years’ imprisonment. It requested the Government to indicate whether trade unionists had been sanctioned under this provision for exercising legitimate trade union activities. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 160 of the Criminal Code has never been used to prosecute trade unionists for exercising legitimate trade union activities. The Government stresses that participants in peaceful strike action assume no criminal liability and that this provision has not been applied in practice. The Committee takes due note of this information and trusts that this provision will not be used to sanction trade unionists for exercising legitimate trade union activities.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

The Committee notes with regret 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 comments.

Repetition

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to organize their administration and activities and to formulate their programmes. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that, according to the Government, the Law on public associations of 2007 is applicable to trade unions, whereas section 2 of that legislation states that this Law is not applicable to trade unions, the establishment and activities of which are regulated by a separate legislation. The Committee requests the Government to provide clarifications regarding the application of the Law on public associations to trade unions.

Furthermore, in its previous comments, the Committee has noted that sections 25 and 34 of the Law on public associations provide that the registering authorities have a right to send its representatives to participate in activities (events) organized by public associations. The Committee considers that problems of compatibility with the Convention arise when the legislation authorizes public authorities to be present at events organized by trade unions. The Committee therefore requests the Government to repeal the abovementioned provisions of the Law on public associations.

Right of organizations freely to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that, according to section 211(2) of the Labour Code of 1997, a decision to declare a strike should be taken by a meeting of workers or of an appropriate workers’ representative body. Such a decision should be adopted by not less than two-thirds of those present at the meeting (representative body) or two-thirds of the delegates to the conference of workers’ representatives, subject to a quorum of more than half of all members of the workforce (representative body) being present at the meeting (or two-thirds of delegates present at the conference). The Committee once again requests the Government to amend section 211(2) of the Labour Code so as to lower this requirement and so as to ensure that account is taken only of the votes cast in determining the outcome of a strike ballot.

Furthermore, the Committee had noted that section 211(3) of the Labour Code imposes the obligation to indicate, in the strike notice, its possible duration and had requested the Government to indicate whether workers or their organizations can declare a strike for an indefinite period of time. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate whether workers or their organizations can declare a strike for an indefinite period of time.

Finally, the Committee had further noted that according to section 211(4) of the Labour Code, right to strike can be restricted in cases where it might endanger the life and health of individuals or the security and defence capacity of the State and that such restrictions are subject to the provisions of the legislation in force. While noting that restrictions of the right to strike seem to be limited to the essential services in the strict sense of the term, the Committee requests the Government to provide a list of services where the right to strike is restricted or prohibited and to indicate the relevant legislative provisions. Furthermore, the Committee requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, whether compensatory guarantees are given to workers deprived of their right to strike and to indicate the applicable legislative provisions.

Criminal Code. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that, under section 160 of the Criminal Code, a violation of procedure for organizing and carrying out meetings, demonstrations and pickets is sanctioned by a fine of up to 2,000 minimum salaries or of up to two years’ imprisonment. The Committee once again recalls that no penal sanction should be imposed against a worker for having carried out a peaceful strike and therefore measures of imprisonment should not be imposed on any account. Such sanctions could be envisaged only where, during a strike, violence against persons or property or other serious infringements of rights have been committed, and can be imposed pursuant to legislation punishing such acts. Nevertheless, even in the absence of violence, if the strike modalities had the effect of making the strike illegitimate, proportionate disciplinary sanctions may be imposed against strikers. In these circumstances, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether trade unionists have been sanctioned under section 160 of the Criminal Code for exercising legitimate trade union activities, such as strikes and meetings and to take the necessary measures in order to amend its legislation so as to bring it into conformity with the abovementioned principle.

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

The Committee notes with regret 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.

Repetition

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to organize their administration and activities and to formulate their programmes. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that, according to the Government, the Law on public associations of 2007 is applicable to trade unions, whereas section 2 of that legislation states that this Law is not applicable to trade unions, the establishment and activities of which are regulated by a separate legislation. The Committee requests the Government to provide clarifications regarding the application of the Law on public associations to trade unions.

Furthermore, in its previous comments, the Committee has noted that sections 25 and 34 of the Law on public associations provide that the registering authorities have a right to send its representatives to participate in activities (events) organized by public associations. The Committee considers that problems of compatibility with the Convention arise when the legislation authorizes public authorities to be present at events organized by trade unions. The Committee therefore requests the Government to repeal the abovementioned provisions of the Law on public associations.

Right of organizations freely to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that, according to section 211(2) of the Labour Code of 1997, a decision to declare a strike should be taken by a meeting of workers or of an appropriate workers’ representative body. Such a decision should be adopted by not less than two-thirds of those present at the meeting (representative body) or two-thirds of the delegates to the conference of workers’ representatives, subject to a quorum of more than half of all members of the workforce (representative body) being present at the meeting (or two-thirds of delegates present at the conference). The Committee once again requests the Government to amend section 211(2) of the Labour Code so as to lower this requirement and so as to ensure that account is taken only of the votes cast in determining the outcome of a strike ballot.

Furthermore, the Committee had noted that section 211(3) of the Labour Code imposes the obligation to indicate, in the strike notice, its possible duration and had requested the Government to indicate whether workers or their organizations can declare a strike for an indefinite period of time. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate whether workers or their organizations can declare a strike for an indefinite period of time.

Finally, the Committee had further noted that according to section 211(4) of the Labour Code, right to strike can be restricted in cases where it might endanger the life and health of individuals or the security and defence capacity of the State and that such restrictions are subject to the provisions of the legislation in force. While noting that restrictions of the right to strike seem to be limited to the essential services in the strict sense of the term, the Committee requests the Government to provide a list of services where the right to strike is restricted or prohibited and to indicate the relevant legislative provisions. Furthermore, the Committee requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, whether compensatory guarantees are given to workers deprived of their right to strike and to indicate the applicable legislative provisions.

Criminal Code. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that, under section 160 of the Criminal Code, a violation of procedure for organizing and carrying out meetings, demonstrations and pickets is sanctioned by a fine of up to 2,000 minimum salaries or of up to two years’ imprisonment. The Committee once again recalls that no penal sanction should be imposed against a worker for having carried out a peaceful strike and therefore measures of imprisonment should not be imposed on any account. Such sanctions could be envisaged only where, during a strike, violence against persons or property or other serious infringements of rights have been committed, and can be imposed pursuant to legislation punishing such acts. Nevertheless, even in the absence of violence, if the strike modalities had the effect of making the strike illegitimate, proportionate disciplinary sanctions may be imposed against strikers. In these circumstances, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether trade unionists have been sanctioned under section 160 of the Criminal Code for exercising legitimate trade union activities, such as strikes and meetings and to take the necessary measures in order to amend its legislation so as to bring it into conformity with the abovementioned principle.

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

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 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to organize their administration and activities and to formulate their programmes. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that, according to the Government, the Law on Public Associations of 2007 is applicable to trade unions, whereas section 2 of that legislation states that this Law is not applicable to trade unions, the establishment and activities of which are regulated by a separate legislation. The Committee requests the Government to provide clarifications regarding the application of the Law on Public Associations to trade unions.

Furthermore, in its previous comments, the Committee has noted that sections 25 and 34 of the Law on Public Associations provide that the registering authorities have a right to send its representatives to participate in activities (events) organized by public associations. The Committee recalled that freedom of association implies that workers’ and employers’ organizations should have the right to organize their activities in full freedom without interference from the authorities. The Committee considers that problems of compatibility with the Convention arise when the legislation authorizes public authorities to be present at events organized by trade unions. The Committee therefore requests the Government to repeal the corresponding provisions of sections 25 and 34 of the Law on Public Associations and to indicate the measures taken or contemplated in this respect.

Right to strike. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that, according to section 211(2) of the Labour Code of 1997, a decision to declare a strike should be taken by a meeting of workers or of an appropriate workers’ representative body. Such a decision should be adopted by not less than two-thirds of those present at the meeting (representative body) or two-thirds of the delegates to the conference of workers’ representatives, subject to a quorum of more than half of all members of the workforce (representative body) being present at the meeting (or two-thirds of delegates present at the conference). The Committee had recalled that, while a requirement of a strike ballot does not, in principle, raise problems of compatibility with the Convention, the ballot method, the quorum and the majority required should not be such that the exercise of the right to strike becomes very difficult, or even impossible in practice; if a member State deems it appropriate to establish in its legislation provisions which require a vote by workers before a strike can be held, it should ensure that account be taken only of the votes cast and that the required quorum and majority are fixed at a reasonable level (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 170). In these circumstances, the Committee had indicated that, while the quorum provided for by section 211(2) seems to be compatible with the freedom of association principles, the requirement that a decision to strike should be taken by two-thirds of those present at the meeting is excessive and limits the right to strike. The Committee notes that the Government does not provide information in respect to its previous request. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to amend section 211(2) of the Labour Code so as to lower this requirement and so as to ensure that account is taken only of the votes cast in determining the outcome of a strike ballot. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated in this respect in its next report.

Furthermore, the Committee had noted that section 211(3) of the Labour Code imposes the obligation to indicate, in the strike notice, its possible duration and had requested the Government to indicate whether workers or their organizations can declare a strike for an indefinite period of time. The Committee notes that, in its report, the Government indicates that the strike notice must be given to the employer not less than two weeks before the strike but makes no reference to the duration of the strike. Consequently, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate whether workers or their organizations can declare a strike for an indefinite period of time.

Finally, the Committee had further noted that according to section 211(4) of the Labour Code, right to strike can be restricted in cases where it might endanger the life and health of individuals or the security and defence capacity of the State and that such restrictions are subject to the provisions of the legislation in force. The Committee notes that the Government does not refer to this issue in its report. While noting that restrictions of the right to strike seem to be limited to the essential services in the strict sense of the term, the Committee requests the Government to provide a list of services where the right to strike is restricted or prohibited and to indicate the relevant legislative provisions. Recalling that if the right to strike is subject to restrictions or a prohibition, workers who are thus deprived of an essential means of defending their socio-economic and occupational interests should be afforded compensatory guarantees, the Committee requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, whether any such protection is given to workers deprived of their right to strike and to indicate the applicable legislative provisions.

Criminal Code. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that, under section 160 of the Criminal Code, a violation of procedure for organizing and carrying out meetings, demonstrations and pickets is sanctioned by a fine of up to 2,000 minimum salaries or of up to two years’ imprisonment. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that the Criminal Code is based on principle of legality, equality before the law, personal responsibility, guilt, impartiality, humanity, democracy, and so on, and that section 160 of the Criminal Code applies to all persons, irrespective of their position and status. The Committee recalls that no penal sanction should be imposed against a worker for having carried out a peaceful strike and therefore measures of imprisonment should not be imposed on any account. Such sanctions could be envisaged only where, during a strike, violence against persons or property or other serious infringements of rights have been committed, and can be imposed pursuant to legislation punishing such acts. Nevertheless, even in the absence of violence, if the strike modalities had the effect of making the strike illegitimate, proportionate disciplinary sanctions may be imposed against strikers. In these circumstances, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether trade unionists have been sanctioned under section 160 of the Criminal Code for exercising legitimate trade union activities, such as strikes and meetings and to take the necessary measures in order to amend its legislation so as to bring it into conformity with the abovementioned principle.

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

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to organize their administration and activities and to formulate their programmes. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that, according to the Government, the Law on Public Associations of 2007 is applicable to trade unions, whereas section 2 of that legislation states that this Law is not applicable to trade unions, the establishment and activities of which are regulated by a separate legislation. The Committee requests the Government to provide clarifications regarding the application of the Law on Public Associations to trade unions.

Furthermore, in its previous comments, the Committee has noted that sections 25 and 34 of the Law on Public Associations provide that the registering authorities have a right to send its representatives to participate in activities (events) organized by public associations. The Committee recalled that freedom of association implies that workers’ and employers’ organizations should have the right to organize their activities in full freedom without interference from the authorities. The Committee considers that problems of compatibility with the Convention arise when the legislation authorizes public authorities to be present at events organized by trade unions. The Committee therefore requests the Government to repeal the corresponding provisions of sections 25 and 34 of the Law on Public Associations and to indicate the measures taken or contemplated in this respect.

Right to strike. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that, according to section 211(2) of the Labour Code of 1997, a decision to declare a strike should be taken by a meeting of workers or of an appropriate workers’ representative body. Such a decision should be adopted by not less than two-thirds of those present at the meeting (representative body) or two-thirds of the delegates to the conference of workers’ representatives, subject to a quorum of more than half of all members of the workforce (representative body) being present at the meeting (or two-thirds of delegates present at the conference). The Committee had recalled that, while a requirement of a strike ballot does not, in principle, raise problems of compatibility with the Convention, the ballot method, the quorum and the majority required should not be such that the exercise of the right to strike becomes very difficult, or even impossible in practice; if a member State deems it appropriate to establish in its legislation provisions which require a vote by workers before a strike can be held, it should ensure that account be taken only of the votes cast and that the required quorum and majority are fixed at a reasonable level (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 170). In these circumstances, the Committee had indicated that, while the quorum provided for by section 211(2) seems to be compatible with the freedom of association principles, the requirement that a decision to strike should be taken by two-thirds of those present at the meeting is excessive and limits the right to strike. The Committee notes that the Government does not provide information in respect to its previous request. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to amend section 211(2) of the Labour Code so as to lower this requirement and so as to ensure that account is taken only of the votes cast in determining the outcome of a strike ballot. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated in this respect in its next report.

Furthermore, the Committee had noted that section 211(3) of the Labour Code imposes the obligation to indicate, in the strike notice, its possible duration and had requested the Government to indicate whether workers or their organizations can declare a strike for an indefinite period of time. The Committee notes that, in its report, the Government indicates that the strike notice must be given to the employer not less than two weeks before the strike but makes no reference to the duration of the strike. Consequently, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate whether workers or their organizations can declare a strike for an indefinite period of time.

Finally, the Committee had further noted that according to section 211(4) of the Labour Code, right to strike can be restricted in cases where it might endanger the life and health of individuals or the security and defence capacity of the State and that such restrictions are subject to the provisions of the legislation in force. The Committee notes that the Government does not refer to this issue in its report. While noting that restrictions of the right to strike seem to be limited to the essential services in the strict sense of the term, the Committee requests the Government to provide a list of services where the right to strike is restricted or prohibited and to indicate the relevant legislative provisions. Recalling that if the right to strike is subject to restrictions or a prohibition, workers who are thus deprived of an essential means of defending their socio-economic and occupational interests should be afforded compensatory guarantees, the Committee requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, whether any such protection is given to workers deprived of their right to strike and to indicate the applicable legislative provisions.

Criminal Code. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that, under section 160 of the Criminal Code, a violation of procedure for organizing and carrying out meetings, demonstrations and pickets is sanctioned by a fine of up to 2,000 minimum salaries or of up to two years’ imprisonment. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that the Criminal Code is based on principle of legality, equality before the law, personal responsibility, guilt, impartiality, humanity, democracy, and so on, and that section 160 of the Criminal Code applies to all persons, irrespective of their position and status. The Committee recalls that no penal sanction should be imposed against a worker for having carried out a peaceful strike and therefore measures of imprisonment should not be imposed on any account. Such sanctions could be envisaged only where, during a strike, violence against persons or property or other serious infringements of rights have been committed, and can be imposed pursuant to legislation punishing such acts. Nevertheless, even in the absence of violence, if the strike modalities had the effect of making the strike illegitimate, proportionate disciplinary sanctions may be imposed against strikers. In these circumstances, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether trade unionists have been sanctioned under section 160 of the Criminal Code for exercising legitimate trade union activities, such as strikes and meetings and to take the necessary measures in order to amend its legislation so as to bring it into conformity with the abovementioned principle.

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

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to organize their administration and activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee notes that according to the Government’s report, the Law on social associations of 2007 is applicable to trade unions, whereas section 2 of that legislation states that this Law is not applicable to trade unions, the establishment and activities of which are regulated by a separate legislation. The Committee requests the Government to provide clarifications in this regard.

The Committee notes that sections 25 and 34 of the Law on social association provide that the registering authorities have a right to send its representatives to participate in activities (events) organized by social associations. The Committee recalls that freedom of association implies that workers’ and employers’ organizations should have the right to organize their activities in full freedom without interference from the authorities. The Committee considers that problems of compatibility with the Convention arise when the legislation authorizes public authorities to be present at events organized by trade unions and therefore requests the Government to repeal the corresponding provisions of sections 25 and 34 of the Law on social associations. It requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

The Committee notes that according to section 211(2) of the Labour Code of 1997, a decision to declare a strike should be taken by a meeting of workers or of an appropriate workers’ representative body. Such a decision should be adopted by not less than two-thirds of those present at the meeting (representative body) or two-thirds of the delegates to the conference of workers’ representatives, subject to a quorum of more than half of all members of the workforce (representative body) being present at the meeting (or two-thirds of delegates present at the conference). The Committee considers that while a requirement of a strike ballot does not, in principle, raise problems of compatibility with the Convention, the ballot method, the quorum and the majority required should not be such that the exercise of the right to strike becomes very difficult, or even impossible in practice; if a member State deems it appropriate to establish in its legislation provisions which require a vote by workers before a strike can be held, it should ensure that account be taken only of the votes cast and that the required quorum and majority are fixed at a reasonable level (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 170). In these circumstances, the Committee considers that while the quorum provided for by section 211(2) seems to be compatible with the freedom of association principles, the requirement that a decision to strike should be taken by two-thirds of those present at the meeting is excessive and limits the right to strike. The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend section 211(2) of the Labour Code, so as to lower this requirement and so as to ensure that account is taken only of the votes cast in determining the outcome of a strike ballot. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

The Committee notes that section 211(3) of the Labour Code imposes the obligation to indicate, in the strike notice, its possible duration. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether workers or their organizations can declare a strike for an indefinite period of time.

The Committee further notes that according to section 211(4) of the Labour Code, right to strike can be restricted in cases where this might endanger the life and health of individuals or the security and defence capacity of the State and that such restrictions are subject to the provisions of the legislation in force. While noting that restrictions of the right to strike seem to be limited to the essential services in the strict sense of the term, the Committee requests the Government to provide a list of services where the right to strike is restricted or prohibited and to indicate the relevant legislative provisions. Recalling that if the right to strike is subject to restrictions or a prohibition, workers who are thus deprived of an essential means of defending their socio-economic and occupational interests should be afforded compensatory guarantees, the Committee requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, whether any such protection is given to workers deprived of their right to strike and to indicate the applicable legislative provisions.

The Committee notes that under section 160 of the Criminal Code, a violation of procedure for organizing and carrying out meetings, manifestations and pickets is sanctioned by a fine of up to 2,000 minimum salaries or of up to two years’ imprisonment. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether trade unionists can be sanctioned under this provision for exercising legitimate trade union activities, such as strikes and meetings.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report. The Committee further notes the Law on Employers’ Associations of 17 May 2004, the Law on Assemblies, Meetings, Demonstrations and Peaceful Processions of 2 May 1998, and the Penal Code of 21 May 1998. The Committee will examine these pieces of legislation at its next meeting, once translation thereof is available.

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

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

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of workers’ and employers’ organizations to draw up their constitutions and rules, to elect their representatives in full freedom and to organize their administration and activities. 1. Concerning section 4(1) of the Law on Trade Unions which provides that trade unions shall be independent in their activities and that any interference by state authorities shall not be permitted except in cases specified by law, the Committee requests the Government to specify in its next report in which cases the state authorities are allowed to interfere with trade union activities.

Concerning section 211 of the Labour Code which provides that restrictions of the right to strike shall be subject to the provisions of legislation in force in Tajikistan, the Committee requests the Government to provide the text of the provisions relating to such restrictions. Furthermore, the Committee requests the Government to state whether the former provisions of the Penal Code which were at the time applicable in the USSR, and particularly section 190(3), which contained significant restrictions on the exercise of the right to strike in the transport sector, enforceable by severe sanctions, including sentences of imprisonment for up to three years, have been repealed by a specific text.

The Committee also requests the Government to supply in its next report a copy of the Law of 29 June 1991 regulating the organization and holding of meetings, gatherings, street processions and demonstrations. In addition, the Committee requests the Government to indicate what are the legal provisions on the right to organize of employers.

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

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

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

1. Article 3 of the Convention. Right of workers’ and employers’ organizations to draw up their constitutions and rules, to elect their representatives in full freedom and to organize their administration and activities. Concerning article 4(1) of the Law on Trade Unions which provides that trade unions shall be independent in their activities and that any interference by state authorities shall not be permitted except in cases specified by law, the Committee requests the Government to specify in its next report in which cases the state authorities are allowed to interfere with trade union activities.

2. Article 3. Right to strike. Concerning article 211 of the Labour Code which provides that restrictions of the right to strike shall be subject to the provisions of legislation in force in Tajikistan, the Committee requests the Government to provide the text of the provisions relating to such restrictions. Furthermore, the Committee requests the Government to state whether the former provisions of the Penal Code which were at the time applicable in the USSR, and particularly section 190(3), which contained significant restrictions on the exercise of the right to strike in the transport sector, enforceable by severe sanctions, including sentences of imprisonment for up to three years, have been repealed by a specific text.

The Committee also requests the Government to supply in its next report a copy of the Law of 29 June 1991 regulating the organization and holding of meetings, gatherings, street processions and demonstrations. In addition, the Committee requests the Government to indicate what are the legal provisions on the right to organize of employers.

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

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

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

1. Article 3 of the Convention. Right of workers’ and employers’ organizations to draw up their constitutions and rules, to elect their representatives in full freedom and to organize their administration and activities. Concerning article 4(1) of the Law on Trade Unions which provides that trade unions shall be independent in their activities and that any interference by state authorities shall not be permitted except in cases specified by law, the Committee requests the Government to specify in its next report in which cases the state authorities are allowed to interfere with trade union activities.

2. Article 3. Right to strike. Concerning article 211 of the Labour Code which provides that restrictions of the right to strike shall be subject to the provisions of legislation in force in Tajikistan, the Committee requests the Government to provide the text of the provisions relating to such restrictions. Furthermore, the Committee requests the Government to state whether the former provisions of the Penal Code which were at the time applicable in the USSR, and particularly section 190(3), which contained significant restrictions on the exercise of the right to strike in the transport sector, enforceable by severe sanctions, including sentences of imprisonment for up to three years, have been repealed by a specific text.

The Committee also requests the Government to supply in its next report a copy of the Law of 29 June 1991 regulating the organization and holding of meetings, gatherings, street processions and demonstrations. In addition, the Committee requests the Government to indicate what are the legal provisions on the right to organize of employers.

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

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

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

1. Article 3 of the Convention. Right of workers’ and employers’ organizations to draw up their constitutions and rules, to elect their representatives in full freedom and to organize their administration and activities. Concerning article 4(1) of the Law on Trade Unions which provides that trade unions shall be independent in their activities and that any interference by state authorities shall not be permitted except in cases specified by law, the Committee requests the Government to specify in its next report in which cases the state authorities are allowed to interfere with trade union activities.

2. Article 3. Right to strike. Concerning article 211 of the Labour Code which provides that restrictions of the right to strike shall be subject to the provisions of legislation in force in Tajikistan, the Committee requests the Government to provide the text of the provisions relating to such restrictions. Furthermore, the Committee requests the Government to state whether the former provisions of the Penal Code which were at the time applicable in the USSR, and particularly section 190(3), which contained significant restrictions on the exercise of the right to strike in the transport sector, enforceable by severe sanctions, including sentences of imprisonment for up to three years, have been repealed by a specific text.

The Committee also requests the Government to supply in its next report a copy of the Law of 29 June 1991 regulating the organization and holding of meetings, gatherings, street processions and demonstrations. In addition, the Committee requests the Government to indicate what are the legal provisions on the right to organize of employers.

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

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

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report, once again, contains no reply to its previous comments. It urges the Government to provide in its next report full information on the matters raised in its previous comments which concerned the following.

1.  Article 3 of the Convention. Right of workers’ and employers’ organizations to draw up their constitutions and rules, to elect their representatives in full freedom and to organize their administration and activities.  Concerning article 4(1) of the Law on Trade Unions which provides that trade unions shall be independent in their activities and that any interference by state authorities shall not be permitted except in cases specified by law, the Committee requests the Government to specify in its next report in which cases the state authorities are allowed to interfere with trade union activities.

2.  Article 3. Right to strike.  Concerning article 211(3) of the Labour Code which provides that restrictions of the right to strike shall be subject to the provisions of legislation in force in Tajikistan, the Committee requests the Government to provide the text of the provisions relating to such restrictions. Furthermore, the Committee requests the Government to state whether the former provisions of the Penal Code which were at the time applicable in the USSR, and particularly section 190(3), which contained significant restrictions on the exercise of the right to strike in the transport sector, enforceable by severe sanctions, including sentences of imprisonment for up to three years, have been repealed by a specific text.

The Committee also requests the Government to supply in its next report a copy of the Law of 29 June 1991 regulating the organization and holding of meetings, gatherings, street processions and demonstrations. In addition, the Committee requests the Government to indicate what are the legal provisions on the right to organize of employers.

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

The Committee notes that the Government's report contains no reply to its previous comments. It hopes that the next report will include full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request which concerned the following:

1. Article 3 of the Convention. Right of workers' and employers' organizations to draw up their constitutions and rules, to elect their representatives in full freedom and to organize their administration and activities. Concerning article 4(1) of the Law on Trade Unions which provides that trade unions shall be independent in their activities and that any interference by state authorities shall not be permitted except in cases specified by law, the Committee requests the Government to specify in its next report in which cases the state authorities are allowed to interfere with trade union activities.

2. Article 3. Right to strike. Concerning article 211(3) of the Labour Code which provides that restrictions of the right to strike shall be subject to the provisions of legislation in force in Tajikistan, the Committee requests the Government to provide the text of the provisions relating to such restrictions. Furthermore, the Committee requests the Government to state whether the former provisions of the Penal Code which were at the time applicable in the USSR, and particularly section 190(3), which contained significant restrictions on the exercise of the right to strike in the transport sector, enforceable by severe sanctions, including sentences of imprisonment for up to three years, have been repealed by a specific text.

The Committee also requests the Government to supply a copy of the Law of 29 June 1991 regulating the organization and holding of meetings, gatherings, street processions and manifestations. In addition, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the Law on Trade Unions of 1992 also extends to employers as regards the right to organize.

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

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received.

The Committee once again requests the Government to supply the text of the Act on Public Associations of 12 December 1990 in order to enable it to examine its conformity with the principles of freedom of association.

The Committee also requests the Government to supply a copy of the Law of 29 June 1991 regulating the organization and holding of meetings, gatherings, street processions and manifestations, to which it referred in its report received in 1996.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the Law on Trade Unions of 1992 also extends to employers as regards the right to organize.

Article 3 (Right of workers' and employers' organizations to draw up their constitutions and rules, to elect their representatives in full freedom and to organize their administration and activities). Concerning article 4(1) of the Law on Trade Unions which provides that trade unions shall be independent in their activities and that any interference by state authorities shall not be permitted except in cases specified by law, the Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report on which cases the state authorities are allowed to interfere with trade union activities.

Article 3 (Right to strike). Concerning article 211(3) of the Labour Code which provides that restrictions of the right to strike shall be subject to the provisions of legislation in force in Tajikistan, the Committee requests the Government to provide the text of the provisions relating to such restrictions. Furthermore, the Committee requests once again the Government to state whether the former provisions of the Penal Code which were at the time applicable in the USSR, and particularly section 190(3), which contained significant restrictions on the exercise of the right to strike in the transport sector, enforceable by severe sanctions, including sentences of imprisonment for up to three years, have been repealed by a specific text.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 1999.]

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

The Committee notes with satisfaction that the Law on Trade Unions of 12 March 1992 allows for the possibility of trade union pluralism and guarantees the right to strike. It also notes that this Law refers to other legal texts which have not been provided by the Government. It therefore raises a number of points in a request directly addressed to the Government.

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

The Committee notes the Government's report.

It notes in particular that, under the terms of section 23 of the Law on Voluntary Associations, trade union organizations can be dissolved or suspended only by the judicial authority. The Committee requests the Government to supply the text of the above Law.

It also requests the Government to supply a copy of the Law of 29 June 1991 regulating the organization and holding of meetings, gatherings, street processions and manifestations, to which it refers in its report.

The Committee once again requests the Government to supply a copy of the Law on Trade Unions of 12 March 1992 and of any other laws or regulations that apply the provisions of the Convention.

The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the specific provisions which guarantee the right of employers to organize and to provide the relevant texts.

Furthermore, the Committee requests the Government to state whether the former provisions of the Penal Code which were at the time applicable in the USSR, and particularly section 190(3), which contained significant restrictions on the exercise of the right to strike in the public transport sector, enforceable by severe sanctions, including sentences of imprisonment for up to three years, have been repealed by a specific text.

In general, the Committee requests the Government to provide copies of any laws or regulations related to the application of this Convention in order to enable it to examine their conformity with the requirements of the principles set out in the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 83rd ILC session (1996)

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government's first report.

The Committee requests the Government to provide, with its next report, a copy of the law on trade unions of 12 March 1992, of the law on public associations and of any other law or regulation implementing the provisions of the Convention. Moreover, the Committee requests the Government to indicate specifically those provisions which guarantee the right of employers to organize and to provide relevant texts. To the extent that such texts do not exist, the Committee requests the Government to indicate which measures it intends to take to bring its legislation into conformity with the provisions of the Convention in this regard.

Article 4 of the Convention. Dissolution or suspension or cessation of union activities by the administrative authority. The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report the provisions dealing with the dissolution or suspension of workers' and employers' organizations and to provide relevant texts.