Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2002, Publicación: 91ª reunión CIT (2003)

Convenio sobre el trabajo forzoso, 1930 (núm. 29) - Irán (República Islámica del) (Ratificación : 1957)

The Committee has noted the information provided by the Government in reply to its general observation of 2000.

It has also noted the information concerning employment of prisoners supplied by the Government in reply to its earlier comments.

The Committee asks the Government once again to supply, in its next report, full information on the following matters raised in its previous direct request.

Articles 1, paragraph 1, and 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention. Referring to its earlier comments concerning the freedom to leave the service of the State, the Committee noted the Government’s explanations relating to sections 60 and 64 of the Civil Servants Code and section 65 of the Employment Regulations for State Companies. The Government indicated that section 64 of the Civil Servants Code does not provide for criteria for the acceptance or non-acceptance of resignation, but rather provides for the right to resign and the right of the employer to accept or reject the resignation, as well as the right of the employee to appeal against rejection of the resignation. The Committee refers in this connection to paragraph 68 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour where it recalled that the effect of statutory provisions preventing termination of employment of indefinite duration by means of notice of reasonable length is to turn a contractual relationship based on the will of the parties into service by compulsion of law, and is thus incompatible with the Convention. The Committee therefore considers that the present section 64 does not conform to the Convention and hopes that appropriate measures will be adopted to bring this section of the Civil Servants Code into conformity with the Convention and that the Government will supply information on action taken to this end.

As regards section 65 of the Employment Regulations for State Companies, the Committee noted the Government’s statement that this section does not provide for a possibility to reject the resignation. However, the Committee observes that this section makes the resignation effective from the date when the company approves it in writing, whereas an employee is obliged to remain in his/her occupation until the end of the notice period and until the resignation is finally approved by the company. Since there is no provision making the resignation automatically effective upon the expiration of the term of notice, it follows from the wording of this section that the company may in effect refuse to give its approval of the resignation. The Committee therefore hopes that the Government will reconsider this section and that the necessary measures will be adopted in order to bring section 65 into conformity with the Convention on this point. It asks the Government to provide, in its next report, information on any progress made in this regard.