Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2007, Publicación: 97ª reunión CIT (2008)

Convenio sobre la discriminación (empleo y ocupación), 1958 (núm. 111) - Bolivia (Estado Plurinacional de) (Ratificación : 1977)

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:

1. Legislation. With reference to the issues addressed in points 1 and 2 of its previous direct request, the Committee notes that the basic rules of the national personnel administration system, approved by Supreme Decision No. 217064 of 23 May 1997, were amended by Supreme Decree No. 26115 of 16 March 2001, section 56 of which (“requirements”) provides that “all citizens, without any discrimination whatsoever, may aspire to obtain a career position …”, while section 67 (“revocation”) of the same Decree provides that “grounds for lodging an appeal for revocation are unfair or discriminatory treatment and violation of the law governing the conditions of service of public servants, the basic rules of the personnel administration system in the public sector or other current provisions relating to this matter”. The Committee also notes that Act No. 2027 of 1999 on the conditions of service of public servants lays down principles such as “equal opportunities without discrimination of any sort” (section 1(e)), the right to careers in the administration and the right to stability, inspired, amongst other things, by the principle of equality. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, the grounds for lodging an appeal for revocation such as that referred to by the Committee are covered by the terms “discriminatory treatment”, so as to avoid omissions that might lead to the appeal being rejected and which implies that the criteria of the Convention and of all other international human rights instruments are being taken into account. The report adds that, until now, only one case alluding to discrimination has been brought before the Civil Service Superintendence, and that this case involved a female public official dismissed for budgetary reasons who alleged discrimination on the grounds of disability. The official in question also referred to the obligation set forth in Supreme Decree No. 27477 of 2004, which requires public institutions to ensure that persons with disabilities make up 4 per cent of their total personnel. The official was asked to provide a certificate of disability and did not do so, yet the possibility of appeal was not refused given the broad terms of the anti-discriminatory legislation. The Committee duly notes that, according to the Government, all the grounds for discrimination that are prohibited by the Convention and by other international treaties are covered by the broad terms of the reform. The Committee asks the Government to keep it informed of any future appeals alleging discrimination on the grounds covered by the Convention, and the decisions taken, where appropriate.

2. In relation to point 3 of its previous direct request, the Committee notes that the Anti-Discrimination Bill presented by the President of the Human Rights Committee of the Chamber of Deputies did not achieve consensus on the approach to be adopted. At the initiative of the Permanent Assembly of Human Rights, an Anti-Discrimination Bill has recently been drafted and is currently the subject of civil society debate. It has been agreed that the Ministry of Labour, in conjunction with institutions dealing with indigenous peoples and the Ministry of Justice, will examine this Bill in the light of the Convention. The Committee reminds the Government that it is possible to request the technical assistance of the Office to examine the abovementioned Bill in the light of the Convention.

3. Racial discrimination. The Government’s report also indicates that, as well as the legislative measures which may be adopted, the Government has launched a vast anti-discrimination campaign at national level in response to a situation in which ethnic, racial and regional differences have been seriously exacerbated to the point of generating conflict between indigenous persons and mestizos and between persons born in the east (in Santa Cruz, cambas) and those born in the west (in La Paz, collas). The Ministry of Labour launched a broad campaign in the mass media with a view to generating discussion and debate on the dangers of discrimination in a country where the majority of the population is indigenous and to preventing the conflict from having a dangerous effect on access to employment in certain social sectors. The Committee notes the documentation provided by the Government, together with the cassettes and CD-ROMs containing publicity clips such as that produced by the Ombudsperson: “I won’t let myself be discriminated against, nor should you.” The Committee notes with interest the efforts made by the Government to address and put an end to discrimination. It would be grateful if the Government would keep it informed of the policies, measures taken and activities carried out to eliminate discrimination, particularly racial discrimination relating to employment and occupation, and their impact in practice.

4. Access to vocational training. The Committee notes the comprehensive information provided by the Government and the efforts made to facilitate access to vocational and university training for low-income students from rural areas. The Committee notes the various programmes developed by the University of San Andrés (UMSA) and by university-dependant institutes to provide cultural, technical and social training for workers and the general population. It also notes the activities of the Institute of Regional Development (IDR) and the technical university of Oruro in Tarija, and the various technical training programmes, such as that developed with the support of the Government of Denmark, aimed at generating further development in the agricultural sector (PETA) through alternative technical education for men and women from rural areas within the framework of a poverty-reduction programme. The Committee also notes, in particular, the programmes based on model policies with a gender perspective, which aim to improve employability and equality in vocational training by offering women a quality technical education. Such programmes include those being developed with the technical assistance of ILO–CINTERFOR, which has generated a model linking the women’s study programme to the needs of the productive sector, which continues to be carried at FORMUJER–Bolivia. FORMUJER focuses its efforts mainly on young women with low incomes. The success of this programme will depend on its ability to cover a broad group of people, to recognize ethnic and socio-cultural differences and to create possibilities to include different groups. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue providing information on the progress of these programmes, in particular on the progress made with regard to the inclusion of women and ethnic groups in the labour market, and on the impact of such programmes in practice.

5. The Committee notes that the creation of the Advisory Labour Council has, to date, not been possible, but that, since August 2004, the Programme for the Prevention and Resolution of Conflicts of the Organization of American States (OEA–PSPRC/Bolivia) has implemented a programme of technical assistance for the Ministry of Labour which involves three courses of action: (a) institutional strengthening; (b) education and training; and (c) advice and support. The Committee asks the Government to indicate how this programme incorporates policies on equality based on the criteria covered by the Convention.