ILC87 - Report of the Committee on Child Labour (Corr.)

ILO is a specialized agency of the United Nations

87th Session
Geneva, June 1999

Report of the Committee on Child Labour (Corr.)

Discussion in Plenary
Proposed Convention
Proposed Recommendation

Introduction

1. The Committee was originally composed of 217 members (94 Government members, 50 Employer members and 73 Worker members). To achieve equality of voting strength, each Government member entitled to vote was allotted 3,650 votes, each Employer member 6,643 votes and each Worker member 4,550 votes. The composition of the Committee was modified nine times during the session and the number of votes attributed to each member was adjusted accordingly.⁽¹⁾

2. The Committee elected its Officers as follows:

Chairperson:	Mr. A. Atsain (Government member, Côte d'Ivoire);
Vice-Chairpersons:	Mr. B. Botha (Employer member, South Africa) and Mr. L. Trotman (Worker member, Barbados);
Reporter:	Mrs. M. Niven (Government member, United Kingdom).

3. At its tenth sitting, the Committee appointed a Drafting Committee composed of the following members: Mr. A. Anderson (Government member, Australia), Mrs. A. Benhamou (Employer member, France), Mr. S. Steyne (Worker member, United Kingdom), and the Reporter of the Committee, Mrs. M. Niven (Government member, United Kingdom).

4. The Committee held 20 sittings and had before it Reports VI(1) and VI(2A) and (2B), prepared by the Office on the fourth item on the agenda of the Conference: "Child labour".

5. The representative of the Secretary-General presented Report IV(2A), which contained summaries of the comments received from governments, after consultations with the most representative organizations of workers and employers, on the texts prepared by the Office following the 86th Session of the International Labour Conference, in 1998, and Report IV(2B) which contained the text of the Proposed Convention and Recommendation.

6. The representative of the Secretary-General recalled the decisions taken by the Conference the previous year. These were that there should be a legally binding Convention, supplemented by a Recommendation, obliging States ratifying the Convention to take measures to secure the prohibition and immediate elimination of the worst forms of child labour. The Convention should be short, precise and contain basic principles capable of being ratified and effectively implemented. The determination of the types of work deemed to be hazardous or likely to jeopardize the health, safety or morals of children should be made at national level. Access to education should not be a criterion for the definition of the worst forms of child labour, but its importance should be taken into account when taking measures of prevention, removal, rehabilitation and reintegration. Finally, the subject of child soldiers should be deferred to the second discussion.

7. The representative of the Secretary-General noted the exceptionally large response to the text of the proposed Convention and Recommendation and pointed out that the comments showed overwhelming support for a new Convention and Recommendation on the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour. The replies also indicated that the texts of the proposed Convention and Recommendation were a good basis for the second discussion, with consensus on many issues, notably on the principle that there are forms of child labour that cannot be tolerated anywhere and that these should be the priority for national and international action.

8. There was divergence of opinion on some key issues, but the text had been only minimally changed by the Office, as the replies indicated that on most issues the proposed text was accepted by the majority of member States and that, where there were differences, there was insufficient agreement to support one particular position over another. He emphasized that the proposed Convention was concerned first and foremost with situations that could not be tolerated under any circumstances. It applied to all young persons under the age of 18, and would oblige member States which ratified the Convention to take measures to prohibit and immediately eliminate the worst forms of child labour. These worst forms comprised: (i) all forms of slavery and practices similar to slavery, such as the sale and trafficking of children, forced or compulsory labour, debt bondage and serfdom; (ii) the use, procurement or offering of a child for prostitution, production of pornography or pornographic performances; (iii) the use, procurement or offering of a child for illicit activities, in particular for the production and trafficking of drugs; and (iv) work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it was carried out, was likely to jeopardize the health, safety or morals of children.

9. The proposed Convention required that countries design and implement programmes of action to eliminate the worst forms of child labour and that all necessary measures be taken to ensure the effective implementation and enforcement of the provisions of the Convention, including monitoring mechanisms, appropriate sanctions, and measures of prevention, removal, rehabilitation and social reintegration. Particular attention was to be given to the special situation of girls and of other children at special risk. Finally, it required member States to take steps to assist one another in giving effect to the provisions of the Convention. The proposed Recommendation provided further guidance concerning the definition of hazardous work, the elements of a programme of action, and provisions designed to aid effective enforcement and implementation.

10. The representative of the Secretary-General highlighted some of the major issues likely to come up during the second discussion. The first concerned whether all hazardous work covered by the Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138), should be covered by the new Convention. Some had felt that the new Convention had a more limited scope and was concerned with hazardous work which posed imminent danger or with work which should not be tolerated under any circumstances. Others, especially workers' organizations, had expressed a wish to give specific examples in the Convention of work likely to jeopardize the health, safety or morals of children, such as the criteria set out in Paragraph 3 of the proposed Recommendation.

11. The explicit inclusion or not of child soldiers and the use of children in armed conflicts was the second major issue. The third contentious issue was whether the denial of access to education should be a criterion for determining the worst forms of child labour. Some governments and workers' organizations wished to reconsider the issue and suggested various formulations, such as specifying, as a worst form of child labour, work that systematically denied children access to education, whilst some governments and employers' organizations opposed this on the basis that it would broaden the scope of the new Convention to include all child labour.

12. The fourth issue was the relationship between immediate and time-bound measures. The final issue related to the possible role of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and other concerned groups. Several governments had stated that broader consultations should be required in the Convention and there was support from some workers' organizations for consultations with the concerned children and their families.

13. The representative of the Secretary-General concluded by stressing the historical significance of the second discussion on the worst forms of child labour, as new instruments would add to the body of international law begun by the International Labour Organization in 1919, which had culminated in 1973 with the adoption of the comprehensive Minimum Age Convention (No. 138), the ILO's fundamental Convention for the elimination of child labour. He drew attention to the growing international consensus for clearer priorities nationally and internationally to tackle the problem of the worst forms of child labour, as reflected especially in the resolution concerning the elimination of child labour, adopted in 1996 by the International Labour Conference. The resolution had reaffirmed the long-standing policy of the ILO to put an end to child labour, and called for policies to "immediately proceed to put an end to the most intolerable aspects of child labour, namely the employment of children in slave-like and bonded conditions and in dangerous and hazardous work, the exploitation of very young children, and the commercial sexual exploitation of children".

General discussion

14. The Employer Vice-Chairperson expressed the Employer members' desire for a universally ratifiable and meaningful Convention. It should not be a repetition of Convention No. 138, but should be concise, simple, understandable, unambiguous, focused and realistic. The reasons for this were that children themselves had to feel and be protected, that anything less than full ratification would result in the continuation of practices which injure, maim and kill children, and that unrealistic, ambiguous and complicated instruments would result in confusion, uncertainty, avoidance and excuses. He stressed that the Employer members remained committed to these intentions.

15. He referred to the issues already agreed upon which the representative of the Secretary-General had outlined earlier noting, in particular, that age 18 was appropriate as the Convention did not refer to all work, only its worst forms, was consistent with the higher minimum age in Convention No. 138 and did not affect its other minimum ages, and was also consistent with the definition of "child" in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. There was, however, some unease amongst the Employer members regarding the age of 18, contrasting this, for example, with the lower minimum age for marrying. He called on all those present not to unravel what had been agreed, as this would almost certainly result in repeating the previous year's work.

16. He also stated that some issues required further debate, including the possibility of a shorter, more concise and meaningful Preamble, the need for a common understanding of the words "immediate", "effective" and "time-bound", the issues of the inclusion of child soldiers and the wording on education and whether they would promote or hinder ratification, and the role of NGOs.

17. The Employer Vice-Chairperson stressed that the Employer members were committed to finding consensus on these issues and that they also remained committed to the development of a universally ratifiable and immediately implementable Convention. The questions under consideration were life and death issues relating to the protection of children. He considered that the new Convention was fundamental to the ILO's reputation.

18. The Worker Vice-Chairperson expressed the willingness of the Worker members to work for a ratifiable instrument. The Worker members did not want an instrument resulting in an advantageous position for one or the other group; they wanted to develop an instrument that could be presented before the conscience of the world and effect change. The instruments should be dealt with expeditiously for the sake of the children and in order to take care of their future. He stated that child labour could not be addressed in isolation from the ILO's Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up, adopted by the International Labour Conference at its 86th Session, Geneva, 1998. He noted the presence of the NGOs and the participants in the Global March against Child Labour. The children had brought demands that could not be overlooked.

19. The Worker Vice-Chairperson referred to the reply to the Government of Canada in the Office Commentary in Report IV(2A), Child Labour, under Article 4, paragraph 1, concerning possible complaints based on the omission of types of work from the list to be determined and the role of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations in interpreting it. The Worker members indicated their intention to request a clarification.

20. The Worker Vice-Chairperson emphasized that the Worker members were open to dialogue and discussion and had conducted discussions over the past year with many parties all around the world. He stated that much could be achieved from informal dialogue and recalled that the Committee on Child Labour had not had a single vote during the first discussion and that he hoped to repeat that record this year. He considered that the instrument under discussion would be a flagship for the ILO, which would heighten the ILO's reputation throughout the world. The ILO was the one institution that reflected the views of employers' and workers' organizations; and it played a central role in the promotion of social dialogue to maintain democracy.

21. The Worker Vice-Chairperson emphasized that child labour was a human rights issue which needed the framework of the Convention to be operationalized. The proposed instrument was not intended to reword Convention No. 138, but to complement it. Nor was the instrument intended to be used to vilify governments that permitted child labour. However, whatever the reasons for the existence of child labour, immediate action had to be taken to deal with its worst forms. He reiterated that the focus of discussion was the worst forms of child labour, not the abolition of all forms of child labour.

22. The Worker Vice-Chairperson highlighted the issues that would be raised by the Worker members, namely, those related to education, child soldiers, the nature of hazardous work, social reintegration and the special situation of girls. He spoke of the advisory and interpretive role of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, pointing out the importance of the record of Committee members' contributions in the Committee's Report, which would subsequently be used to guide interpretation. Everyone wanted the Convention, but the important question was what would happen after adoption of the instrument and what the governments, employers' and workers' organizations would do. Monitoring mechanisms could be envisaged at national level made up of governments, employers' and workers' organizations with NGOs selected after consultation with the social partners; NGOs should not be left out once the Convention was adopted. Reporting mechanisms to bring attention to violations of provisions giving effect to the Convention were also important. There was a need to protect those who reported abuses concerning the worst forms of child labour to make reporting effective.

23. The Government member of the Netherlands, speaking on behalf of the Government members of Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, San Marino, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States, stressed the importance of the instruments under consideration and the great need for clear international commitments to combat exploitative forms of child labour. The first discussion had indicated that the vast majority of Committee members considered the proposed text to be a satisfactory basis for discussion. The new instruments were to focus exclusively on forms of child labour so exploitative and hazardous that no child should be engaged in them. The text of the new Convention needed to be short, clear and concise and it should aim at universal ratification by ILO member States. The new Convention was to complement and be consistent with Convention No. 138; it should also avoid inconsistencies with other international instruments dealing with child labour. The importance of international cooperation and assistance was reaffirmed. She anticipated debates concerning the definition of the worst forms of child labour; the level of detail desirable in the new Convention; and the degree of flexibility to be accorded to the national authorities in determining the worst forms of child labour.

24. The Government member of Switzerland stated her Government firmly believed the adoption of the new instruments was fundamental to the fight against child labour. She recalled that the President of Switzerland had recently announced that Switzerland was likely to ratify Convention No. 138 in 1999, and that it had supported the ILO's International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC), since 1998. She stated that the Government of Switzerland supported the role played by NGOs and other voluntary organizations in this area. Referring to the proposed instruments, she stated that her Government considered that appropriate sanctions, including penal sanctions, were required and called for international cooperation and assistance in addressing the problem.

25. The Government member of India confirmed his Government's commitment to the full eradication of all forms of child labour, beginning with the most exploitative and hazardous ones. He expressed support for a new instrument which could be ratified and implemented and had a clear, well-defined scope. All governments had to take immediate action to eliminate the worst forms of child labour, bearing in mind their socio-economic context and specific situation regarding child labour. Precipitate actions could drive children into even deeper forms of exploitation and should be avoided. He stressed that child labour could only be eliminated gradually and that efforts must take into consideration the level of development of each country and be directly linked to the level of international cooperation necessary to promote socio-economic development and the eradication of poverty. He stressed the importance of the multi-dimensional approach contained in the resolution concerning the elimination of child labour adopted by the International Labour Conference in 1996 and the need to include these elements in the text under discussion. Adequate resources needed to be mobilized and the ILO should support job-creation and poverty-eradication programmes. The new instruments should not address the problem of the worst forms of child labour purely in a political and civil rights context. The Convention should combine in a balanced manner elements relating to the eradication of poverty, unemployment and illiteracy which were directly linked to the ILO's efforts to gradually secure the realization of economic and social rights, alongside political and civil freedoms. He indicated that the main areas where changes would be essential to the draft text would be as follows:

the title as well as Article 1 had to make it clear that the Convention addressed immediate and effective action for the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour;
the complex nature of the phenomenon had to be reflected in the Preamble primarily with consensus language of the 1996 ILO resolution;
the scope of the convention should remain focused on the worst and most hazardous forms of child labour and there should be no prescriptive age limit that would undermine ratification prospects;
provisions related to the national implementation of the Convention had to reflect the complex nature of the phenomenon and not create untenable legal obligations for enforcement. The Convention clearly had to indicate that alongside appropriate national legislation, only multidimensional strategies to provide access to educational opportunities (particularly in the 5-14 age group), avenues for gainful employment of parents, eradication of parental illiteracy and protection of all rights of the child contained in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child could effectively eliminate certain manifestations of the worst forms of child labour;
any references to access to education had to reflect that governmental responsibility lay in facilitating the availability of this economic and social right in a progressive and developmental context. They also had to indicate that the implementation of desired goals such as compulsory primary education had to be seen in conjunction with the availability of resources, including through enhanced international cooperation;
draft Article 8 of the Convention had to be reinforced through language that explicitly endorsed international cooperation, solidarity and assistance for eradicating poverty and promoting socio-economic development.

26. The Government member of Egypt commented on the very important role played by the ILO in the fight against child labour both at the normative level and through the practical assistance provided by IPEC. She emphasized that poverty remained one of the basic reasons why children had to work and called for a greater focus on national policies and compulsory primary education. She announced her Government's ratification of Convention No. 138 and confirmed Egypt's commitment to respect relevant international standards, which was reflected in recent ministerial decisions. There should be further expansion of ILO's technical assistance programmes in favour of developing countries in their efforts to eliminate child labour.

27. The Government member of China underscored the importance of addressing the worst forms of child labour and confirmed the importance his Government attached to the protection of children. He recalled the ratification in December 1998 of Convention No. 138, which demonstrated China's determination to eliminate the problem. China supported the adoption of the new instruments. A new Convention should be clear, concise, and flexible to make universal ratification more likely. He reaffirmed that poverty was the underlying cause of child labour in many developing countries and called upon the ILO to provide more assistance to countries facing the problem, to allow them to strengthen their economies.

28. The Government member of Japan said that solving the problem of child labour was one of the most important issues facing the world today. He stated that in May 1999 the Japanese Parliament had passed new legislation on punishment for child prostitution and pornography, and that this had enhanced protection of chidren. He stressed that a new Convention should contain only those principles which were essential to eliminate the worst forms of child labour, so that it would be ratifiable by as many countries as possible.

29. The Government member of the Islamic Republic of Iran considered child labour to be a dominant issue of our time. At least 120 million children were working throughout the world, the overwhelming majority of them in developing countries. He cited poverty as the driving force behind child labour. However, there were reasons to be optimistic in view of the emerging consensus on the obligation to combat child labour, especially its intolerable forms. The Islamic Republic of Iran had been able to take successful action against child labour, and its incidence was very low. International organizations, and the ILO in particular, should provide assistance to countries struggling with child labour problems and help them develop comprehensive programmes. These should include statistical work and research, awareness-raising activities and the improvement of education, health and other social services.

30. The Government member of France reaffirmed her Government's dedication to the adoption of a new Convention and emphasized the need to make it one of the ILO's core standards as laid down in the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up. Child labour was not only an economic and social problem, but also a moral one. Recent initiatives against child labour undertaken by her country included a report on child labour in France, a new draft law to respect children's rights and an increased contribution to IPEC.

31. The Government member of Pakistan stressed her Government's commitment to eliminating the worst forms of child labour. A flexible instrument with clear definitions of the worst forms was needed in order to ensure a maximum number of ratifications. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child served as an example in this regard. Any work it was proposed to ban in addition to bonded labour and work in the sex and drugs trade had to be of the same severity as those readily identifiable activities. She also emphasized that the title of the Convention should be modified to bring out the need for prohibition and immediate measures, as opposed to the immediate elimination of the worst forms of child labour.

32. The Government member of Canada reiterated strong Canadian support for the intent and principles of the proposed instruments which had to be simple and focused on the elimination of the worst forms of child labour and allow for immediate and universal ratification. The Global March against Child Labour had provided an even greater incentive to arrive at agreement. She stated that Canada would seek consistency in the references to child labour and the worst forms.

33. The Government member of Sudan emphasized the importance of the child labour issue and cautioned against reopening last year's general discussion. Sudan had recently taken a number of important steps against child labour. These included the establishment of a Council on the Protection of Children, action programmes and improved child support services.

34. The Government member of Norway called for a clearer specification of hazardous types of work and for sufficient flexibility and a stronger reflection of the importance of education in the proposed Convention. The issue of child soldiers should be included and reference to "other concerned groups" reinforced. The Agenda of Action emerging from the 1997 Oslo Conference on Child Labour was cited as a useful tool for international and national action against child labour. Norway contributed to the IPEC programme and would continue to do so in the future. The ILO remained a cornerstone in worldwide efforts to eliminate child labour, but inter-agency cooperation needed to be strengthened.

35. The Government member of Senegal stated that poverty, instability and war in the African region had created a high demand for cheap labour. Child labour undermined children's education and integration into society, therefore there was a need for strong instruments. Children worked in agriculture, cattle raising, as domestic servants, with their families in the informal sector, and as apprentices from the age of six or seven in handicrafts, workshops, and construction sites in unhealthy environments under hazardous working conditions. The Government member of Senegal expressed support for the substance of the proposed Convention. She emphasized the need for a follow-up mechanism, and for providing legal and financial assistance by the ILO where necessary. The Preamble should stress the advantages of concrete action regarding training and education. She hoped the ILO would commit itself to promotional action.

36. The Government member of Lebanon repeated that her Government had enacted a law prohibiting admission to employment for children who had not completed age 15 and hazardous work for children under the age of 17 or 18, depending on the nature of the activities performed. The Government, along with employers' and workers' organizations, had established a national strategy on child labour. The Government believed that the proposed Convention and Recommendation should be clear and flexible and the proposed Recommendation should complement the Convention. She questioned the use of the phrase "applied in conjunction with" in Paragraph 1 of the proposed Recommendation and questioned whether "should" was the proper word in a Recommendation as Recommendations provided guidelines and were not binding instruments.

37. The Government member of Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, strongly supported the unanimous adoption of the proposed Convention. He recalled a number of African meetings on child labour which had enabled the development of an African common position that demanded urgent action be taken against the worst forms of child labour. Poverty and social deprivation had contributed to the rapid increase in the number of children seriously affected by child labour on the continent. He stated that the members of the African Group on the Committee would be guided by the decisions passed by the Labour and Social Affairs Commission of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) and the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, which stated in Article 15 that "every child shall be protected from all forms of economic exploitation and from performing any work that is likely to be hazardous or to interfere with the child's physical, mental, spiritual, moral or social development". The Group would propose several changes to the texts, including an explicit reference to the recruitment and use of children in armed conflict in the definition of the worst forms of child labour; a reference to civil society in the Convention; more explicit language regarding the need for increased technical and financial assistance to complement national efforts aimed at the effective elimination of the worst forms of child labour; and reference to the eradication of poverty, since this was the principal root cause of the worst forms of child labour. Lastly, there was a need to emphasize the need for education with regard to prevention, rehabilitation and reintegration. The need for a concise, ratifiable Convention should not preclude the inclusion of important issues such as poverty eradication measures.

38. The Government member of Morocco emphasized the need to combat poverty in order to eliminate child labour. He stated that the instruments should be clear and that an explanation should be given of how the implementation of this instrument could affect member States. He also noted the need for technical cooperation and financial assistance. He further stated that the involvement of children in armed conflict had to be addressed for the sake of the credibility of the instruments. He also recalled the measures the Government of Morocco had been taking for the protection of children such as the ratification of Convention No. 138, the establishment of a parliament for children and the implementation of a cooperation programme in the framework of IPEC's activities.

39. The Government member of South Africa endorsed the statement made on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee. He stated that the South African Constitution ensured that "every child has the right to be protected from exploitative labour practices". South Africa supported an effective and targeted Convention that supplemented Convention No. 138. He summarized his Government's position on several issues. First, an explicit reference to the prohibition of involvement of children in armed conflict should be made because it affected more than 300,000 children in approximately 30 conflicts in the world. Those children had difficulty demobilizing once peace was restored as they had become accustomed to violence and experienced severe problems when they returned home. The use of child soldiers should be considered an illegal activity. The involvement of children in armed conflict was clearly work which by its nature or circumstances in which it was carried out was likely to jeopardize the health, safety or morals of children. This had been documented by the United Nations Study on the Impact of Armed Conflict on Children (51st Session, 1996). Convention No. 138 established a minimum age of 18 for such dangerous work. Second, a reference should be made to access to education as it was central to the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour. A lack of commitment to provide basic education could unintentionally result in children who were withdrawn from the worst forms of child labour ending up on the street. Third, the proposed Convention should provide clearer guidelines for hazardous work, such as those contained in Article 5, paragraph 3, of Convention No. 138 which indicated the industries or sectors of the economy to which the Convention must as a minimum apply, notably, mining and quarrying; manufacturing; construction; electricity, gas and water; sanitary services; transport, storage, and communication; and plantations and other agricultural undertakings mainly producing for commercial purposes. Such determination at the international level should not preclude additions at the national level. Fourth, there was no contradiction between the concepts of immediate measures and time-bound measures; the Convention should require States to take immediate measures, such as bringing their law and practice into line with international standards, and setting up the necessary institutional capacity and programmes aimed at prohibiting and eliminating the worst forms of child labour. However, the effective elimination of child labour needed well-conceived, strictly time-bound programmes. Fifth, formulating and implementing strategies for the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour should be done with the full participation of employers' and workers' organizations, civil society, community leaders and NGOs. Finally, the proposed Convention was expected to fall within the scope of the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up.

40. The Government member of the Syrian Arab Republic stated that children represented the future and hope of mankind and that they had to be protected to respect their integrity. He favoured the adoption of the Convention and Recommendation to provide a regulatory framework to abolish child labour. All States had a right to a decent standard of economic development but this had to be achieved without child labour. His Government had ratified a number of international instruments and had enacted laws against slavery and practices akin to slavery, sale and trafficking of children, child prostitution, child pornography and violence against children which were severely punished. The Government of the Syrian Arab Republic had also enacted legislation providing compulsory free education and sanctioning parents or guardians who did not send their children to school. The instruments should be flexible, clear, straightforward and easily understood and should avoid obstacles to ratification. The worst forms of child labour should be abolished as soon as possible. He also stated that Article 3(d) and Article 4 needed to be brought into line to avoid the risk of activities being defined as hazardous work in one country but not in another. It should be understood that child labour was remunerated work and this implied that unremunerated work by children was not covered. He also considered that poverty was the root cause of child labour, but other causes also needed to be studied. Parents and guardians needed to be made aware of the issue in order to protect their children.

41. The Government member of the United States commented that the proposed Convention on the worst forms of child labour was an important addition to international labour standards, which historically had addressed the issue of child labour. He noted that the Report of the Director-General to this Session of the ILC foresaw strong action against the worst forms of child labour as an important element for the ILO in future. He stated that the United States Government had accelerated its contributions to IPEC and its action against child labour reflected the personal commitment of the President. He welcomed the presence of two young Americans among participants in the Global March. They had served as a reminder that developed countries, too, had to be vigilant, and the United States had renewed its attention to the issue within the country. He considered that the proposed Convention should be a well-targeted instrument on the worst forms of child labour and be complementary to and consistent with Convention No. 138, while not duplicating its provisions. It should not present technical obstacles to ratification and should strengthen commitment to joint action to eliminate child labour. The definition of hazardous work in Article 3(d) should be different from that in Convention No. 138, should be clear and achievable, and not present technical barriers to ratification. He said this would permit a clearer approach to Article 4, paragraph 1, and would avoid any paradoxical outcomes. Recalling the debate on the age of eligibility for military service, he thought it inadvisable to add unnecessary obstacles to ratification. The intention of the Convention was not to limit traditional national military training and voluntary service consistent with current international law. International legal obligations set an age limit of 15 years, which admittedly was low; but in trying to address these issues it would be prudent not to establish a norm that would prove unworkable or counter-productive. The emphasis should be on the coerced or criminal imposition of military activity. He further stated that education was fundamental to ending child labour, and that it was appropriately addressed in Article 7, though the United States was willing to consider ways to emphasize it further. He concluded by stating that concerning means of action the United States was willing to consider ways of strengthening the obligation for cooperation within the ILO, with other international organizations, and with NGOs and the public at large, who had much to contribute to this effort.

42. The Government member of Bangladesh commented that while there was no doubt that child labour was detrimental to children and that all children should attend school, the reality was different. Poverty was the primary cause of child labour, exacerbated by other factors such as the lack of schools and the inability of families to afford schooling. Socio-economic considerations had to be taken into account when formulating interventions targeting the worst forms of child labour. Legislation was important but insufficient by itself. Policy interventions should be aimed at development, education and social mobilization. The Convention should be flexible and should allow decisions regarding what constituted hazardous work to be made at the national level. He stated that the Government of Bangladesh had demonstrated the political will to address child labour and had instituted national machinery to protect children against abandonment, neglect, economic exploitation and other abuse. With the assistance of IPEC and UNICEF, action by the Bangladeshi Garment Manufacturers Association had now rendered the ready-made garment sector of Bangladesh almost free of child labour.

43. The Government member of Sri Lanka hoped for a Convention that could be ratified and implemented by all member States, whether developed or developing. He recalled the debate on the title of the proposed Convention during the first discussion, and reiterated his support for the position taken by the Governments of India and Pakistan that this should be renamed "Immediate action for the abolition of the worst forms of child labour Convention, 1999". He also suggested that the age to which the Convention would apply should be to those under 15, in line with the age of compulsory education in Sri Lanka and many other countries. Child labour was to be found in the informal sector, not the formal sector, in Sri Lanka as in other developing countries. He considered that poverty was a major cause of child labour and that this needed to be addressed through the generation of employment, foreign capital investment and poverty alleviation programmes; he called for an international fund to this end, financed by a percentage of member States' GNP. The elimination of child labour required the active participation and cooperation not only of governments but also of NGOs, employers' and workers' groups. He also supported the inclusion of child soldiers in the Convention. He reiterated the full support of the Government of Sri Lanka for the proposed Convention, and recalled the recent establishment of a child protection task force in Sri Lanka.

44. The Government member of the Russian Federation confirmed that his Government was in favour of drawing up a Convention complemented by a Recommendation on the worst forms of child labour. He stressed the need for a short, clear, unambiguous and generally acceptable instrument which would permit universal ratification. The Convention should prohibit only the worst forms of child labour and there should be a clearer definition of these forms. However, he doubted the advisability of including a reference to child soldiers, given that this issue was being addressed through the consideration of a United Nations draft optional protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflicts. He commented that if the proposed Convention before the Committee were to be adopted without substantive change it would be a significant step, as it would go further than Convention No. 138. The Preamble should reflect the relation between the new Convention and Convention No. 138 and a comparison of the provisions of each Convention should be made on the basis of general norms in line with international treaties. He stated that the current Convention should be in line with the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up.

45. The Government member of Namibia reported on the decisions taken during the April 1999 Session of the OAU Labour and Social Affairs Commission, chaired by his Government. There was consensus on a large number of issues, although there was some divergence on the definition of hazardous work and the criterion for its determination contained in the proposed instruments. The April Session had recognized four major outstanding issues, namely: the question of child soldiers; the role of education; hazardous work; and the role of NGOs and other concerned groups. It had also been decided to adopt a common African position during the discussion at the 87th Session of the International Labour Conference. The meeting had also urged support for the proposed new Convention and the promotion of African participation in ratification and implementation of the new instruments. Important issues to the African members were the prohibition of the recruitment and use of children in armed conflict, the inclusion of NGOs in the application of the provisions of the Convention, and the need for increased technical and financial assistance.

46. The Government member of Yemen pointed to poverty as a major cause of child labour. The demographic explosion in developing countries, the question of globalization and structural adjustment policies had generated unemployment and had negative repercussions on the child labour situation. Normative work had to be complemented by the support of industrialized countries, which should face up to their moral and humanitarian responsibilities emerging from the globalization process. He highlighted the central role of his Government in identifying and fighting the worst forms of child labour. The Government of Yemen had ratified all relevant Conventions and expressed its support for the new Convention. There were some questions concerning the interpretation of Article 3 of the proposed Convention.

47. The Government member of Chile expressed his Government's support for the adoption of the proposed instruments, which were considered integral to efforts to eliminate child labour. He stated they were complementary to Convention No. 138, and pointed out that the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child was the most complete legal instrument for the protection of children's rights. The standards contained in that Convention needed to be adequately reflected in the text for adoption, namely, mentioning explicitly prohibition of the worst forms of child labour and the obligation on States to protect children against economic exploitation and from performing any work that was likely to be hazardous or to interfere with their education, or be harmful to their health and development; to effectively guarantee their right to education and to ensure they were not enrolled in armed conflicts. He also hoped that the new instruments would be ratified by as many countries as possible.

48. The Government member of Eritrea outlined measures taken by his Government to eliminate child labour. After formal independence in 1993, the Government officially announced compulsory primary education and established programmes of financial support to children to enable their school attendance, with priority for orphans, children with disabilities and street children; and a rehabilitation project and training for homeless adolescents with problems. The Government of Eritrea had signed the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, and its draft Labour Code posed restrictions on the employment of young people. It supported measures by the ILO and the international community to eliminate the worst forms of child labour.

49. The Government member of Saudi Arabia considered that poverty was the main if not the sole cause of child labour, and that it resulted in parents letting their children work in order to boost their low family incomes. This meant that children stopped going to school and risked getting involved in dangerous or morally reprehensible work. In his view, the Convention should make provision for assistance to families with low incomes, as this would help reduce child labour.

50. The Government member of Tunisia outlined action taken by his Government to consolidate measures to protect children and promote their rights, including the establishment of the school-leaving age at 16; the ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child; the creation of a National Council on Children's Affairs, with representatives from ministries concerned, from organizations concerned with children and from the trade union movement, with the aim of contributing to strategies to protect and promote children's physical and psychological health, education and leisure, protecting them from exploitation and abuse and enhancing the role of the family. The Government had promulgated a child protection code and had ratified Convention No. 138 in 1995. The Government of Tunisia supported the adoption of flexible instruments likely to attract a large number of ratifications and to be readily and effectively applied.

51. The Government member of Uruguay supported the aims of the proposed texts as a complement to Convention No. 138. She expressed her Government's support for the inclusion of child soldiers as among the victims of the worst forms of child labour listed in Article 3 of the proposed Convention, as this was one of the most dangerous forms of work; and for raising the age of eligibility for involvement in the armed forces. She welcomed the fact that the members of the African Group on the Committee would be presenting a draft amendment covering the recruitment and involvement of children in warfare. Her Government was also ready to accept, in the context of the present Convention, the reference only to participation and was open to the recruitment of persons to the armed forces under the age of 18 for the purposes of vocational training only, as a way of enabling national legislation to adapt gradually to this new international standard.

52. The Government member of Zimbabwe stated that she joined other countries in their commitment to the care and protection of children. Along with a traditionally protective culture, a supportive NGO constituency and positive national legislation, her country was working towards making children's rights a reality. However, unless poverty was addressed, legislation would eliminate child labour on paper only. The Convention should be a practical instrument and programming tool aimed at gradually eliminating poverty and providing children with the means, not only of survival, but of development. The Government member of Zimbabwe recognized the importance of basic primary education and free education was being targeted to destitute families. She concluded that there was a need to protect children from damaging experiences, and this included their participation in all forms of military conflict.

53. The Government member of Ethiopia stated that the future of all countries depended on their children. It was unthinkable to expect sustained development without giving due attention to the welfare of children. The worst forms of child labour characterized by exploitation, serious abuse, excessive long hours, low or no pay, inadequate working conditions and exposure to occupational hazards should be prohibited and eliminated. For these reasons the Ethiopian Government strongly supported unanimous approval and ratification of the proposed Convention and Recommendation. The instruments should not seek to revise or replace existing standards on child labour but rather expressly refer and reaffirm their complementary nature. The Convention should take into account the reality of widespread poverty and underdevelopment and the need for continued and increased international cooperation. The Government member of Ethiopia also emphasized the disturbing trend of recruiting and using children in armed hostilities. Children were not only victims of violence in situations of armed conflicts, but also served as instruments of violence, trained or indoctrinated to kill and abuse other children and adults. Recruiting and using children for warfare not only destroyed their moral values but also inclucated a culture of violence and intolerance. This in turn made rehabilitation, reconstruction and reconciliation even more daunting tasks. The proposed Convention should incorporate the recruitment for and the use of children in armed conflict as a worst form of child labour; showing the resolve of the world community to prohibit and eliminate this heinous practice. He concluded by informing the Committee that Ethiopia had recently ratified Convention No. 138, together with the Equal Remuneration Convention, 1957 (No. 100) and the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1951 (No. 105), bringing to six the number of fundamental ILO Conventions ratified by Ethiopia.

54. The general discussion was concluded by brief comments from the Employer and Worker Vice-Chairpersons. The Employer Vice-Chairperson noted the commitment of the Committee to reach a consensus but regretted the lack of focus and precision in much of the general discussion. The Employer members were particularly concerned about the issues of child soldiers, the role of NGOs and Article 3(d) on hazardous work. They also regarded Article 7, paragraph 2, as problematic since it could put an obligation on States to set up programmes to ensure free, basic education while there were still 25 countries in the world without compulsory education in place. He encouraged the countries concerned to consider this Article carefully. Another area of concern was the frequently mentioned link between poverty and child labour. While he recognized that there was no doubt about this interrelationship, he appealed to the Committee to concentrate on the worst forms of child labour for which poverty could not provide an excuse for inaction.

55. The Worker Vice-Chairperson expressed disappointment at the lack of consistency between the intentions expressed in the general discussion and the content of the first amendments submitted. These amendments cast some doubt on whether the Committee would be able to arrive at a Convention at all. He recalled the level of international attention focused on the work of the Committee and appealed to its members to consider the consequences of failure to reach agreement.

56. The representative speaking on behalf of NGOs from the Americas pointed out that there were some 30 million children working in the Americas, many of them in hazardous conditions such as in brick-manufacturing, quarrying, mining, agriculture, in factories, building sites and as domestic servants. Poverty was the primary cause of child labour, and far-reaching and radical changes were necessary to address the issue. The proposed Convention on the worst forms of child labour was one such measure. She stated that Article 3 of the Convention was welcome, however, it should reckon with the fact that 75 per cent of working children in the region did not attend school. Article 32 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child recognized the importance of including as harmful, work which denied access to schooling and she appealed for consistency in international instruments relating to children's rights. She also appealed for an inclusion in Article 3 of the proposed Convention a reference to children in armed conflict as this, by its nature, was harmful to a child. She concluded that eliminating child labour required broad consensus, coordination and action of all governments, employers' and workers' organizations, NGOs and child workers themselves.

57. The representative speaking on behalf of African-based NGOs commended the new Convention for setting the age to which the Convention would apply at 18, in conformity with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and with Convention No. 138. She considered that education was crucial to successfully tackling the problem of child labour, and that without it the vicious cycle of poverty would not be broken. She noted the role of civil society in the fight against child labour, commenting that for the Convention to systematically exclude their participation would be an oversight. She stressed the need to include in the proposed Convention practices which were particular to the situation in Africa, including all forms of traditional, cultural, religious practices and rituals that predispose children to child labour, such as arranged and forced child marriages, offering of children to shrines, and mock child marriages; the use of children in slave-like and invisible domestic work; and the use, procuring or offering of a child for armed conflict.

58. The representative speaking on behalf of Asian-based NGOs reiterated the Global March's call for all governments, employers' and workers' organizations to unite with the child workers, their families and communities to combat exploitative child labour. She stated that, in keeping with the spirit of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, these working children had the right to be protected from exploitative and hazardous work and abuse. Most child labourers in the Asian region worked in the informal sector, largely hidden from view, so it was important that the new Convention and national plans of action should address child labour in these areas. She stated that Governments needed to develop basic education which was child-centred, relevant and accessible to the poor, and to strengthen informal and vocational education for children once they were removed from hazardous working conditions and bonded labour. She commented that it was imperative for working children, their families, communities, concerned NGOs and civic organizations to be seen as active partners and collaborators in national plans of action on the new Convention. She concluded with a call for governments, and employers' and workers' organizations to ensure that it was translated into practical action in their own countries.

59. The representative speaking on behalf of European-based NGOs welcomed the new Convention, which she believed would provide a legal framework to help reinforce the activities of civic organizations working on the issue. She stressed that the worst forms of child labour were not found only in developing countries and pointed to the thousands of asylum-seekers, refugee and migrant children working in hazardous forms of labour in Europe. The new Convention would be missing an essential component if it did not specifically prohibit child participation in armed conflict irrespective of how they were recruited. She considered that all children had a right to basic education, which was essential to their development and future prospects. She noted with pleasure that the Report of the Director-General to the Conference referred to the possibility of expanding social dialogue to include civic organizations, and stated her concern that the proposed new Convention did not reflect that important role in combating child labour. She pointed out that IPEC included NGOs amongst its main partners at the country level, and called for the views of children and families directly affected by the worst forms of child labour and of relevant civil society organizations to be taken into account, when determining types of hazardous work and when designing, implementing and monitoring action programmes.

60. The representative speaking on behalf of the Global March against Child Labour reiterated its support to governments, employers' and workers' organizations to achieve rapid ratification and implementation of the new Convention. He pointed out the need to differentiate between the issue of poverty and child labour, and urged all parties concerned to take immediate measures to put an end to the worst forms of child labour. Education was considered a fundamental right for children and experience had shown that educational programmes could also be offered in countries where a large portion of the population lived below the poverty line. He concluded by urging member States to consider the elimination of the worst forms of child labour as a moral and social commitment. The Worker Vice-Chairperson indicated that the organizers of the Global March had been in constant discussion with the Worker members about reaching an agreement on language acceptable to them.

Consideration of the proposed texts contained
in Report IV(2B)

A. Proposed Convention concerning the
prohibition and immediate elimination
of the worst forms of child labour

Title

61. A series of amendments were submitted and discussed concerning whether the title should refer to "immediate prohibition", but not "immediate elimination"; "immediate measures for elimination", rather than "immediate elimination"; "effective" elimination, instead of "immediate" elimination; and "prohibition and elimination" without any reference to "immediate". As the discussion below reveals, consensus was reached on the phrase "prohibition and immediate action for the elimination" of the worst forms of child labour.

62. The Employer members submitted an amendment to replace the word "concerning" by "on" and delete the word "immediate". The Employer members argued that while it was necessary to refer to urgency and immediacy of action in the body of the text of the Convention, its title should remain simple and concise.

63. The Worker members pointed to the need to keep the word "concerning" as this was the term commonly used in other ILO Conventions. They strongly opposed the second part of the amendment on the grounds that the requirement of immediacy for the elimination of the worst forms of child labour was an essential element of the proposed Convention. The deletion of "immediate" was also opposed by the Government member of Ethiopia. The Government member of India suggested a subamendment to insert "measures for the" so that the reference would be to immediate "measures for the" elimination of the worst forms of child labour. The Government members of Ethiopia and Zimbabwe supported the subamendment but the Employer and Worker members opposed it. The Government member of Switzerland opposed both the amendment and the subamendment. The Employer members withdrew the amendment.

64. The Government members of Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and Venezuela submitted a similar amendment to delete "immediate". The Government member of Colombia speaking on behalf of the abovementioned countries expressed concern about the future implementation of the Convention with the title as proposed. He anticipated difficulties for the international community if the title did not correspond to the results produced by the instrument itself. Given their commitment to eliminating the worst forms of child labour, they withdrew the amendment but emphasized that the terminology would create obstacles for the implementation of the Convention.

65. The Government member of Morocco submitted an amendment to insert the word "immediate" before the word "prohibition" and replace the word "immediate" with the word "effective" before the word "elimination", so that the title would read as follows: "Proposed Convention concerning the immediate prohibition and effective elimination of the worst forms of child labour". The amendment would better reflect that prohibition of the worst forms of child labour through legislative means could be immediate, whereas their elimination required time. The Government member of India supported the amendment indicating the need to adopt an instrument which contained achievable goals. The Worker and the Employer members opposed the amendment, as did the Government members of Canada, Finland, Netherlands, Switzerland and Zimbabwe, while the Government member of Angola supported it. The Government member of Nigeria supported the first part of the amendment and proposed a subamendment to change the second part to read: "effective measures for the elimination". The Government member of Morocco supported the subamendment, but in view of the insufficient support indicated for the amendment, withdrew it.

66. The Government member of Ethiopia on behalf of the Government members of the African Group on the Committee submitted an amendment to insert after the word "immediate" the words "measures for the". He referred to the previous discussions and confirmed that the title should refer to immediate measures for elimination, not immediate elimination. The Worker members opposed the amendment, reaffirming that the commitment was to immediate elimination, but that it was understood that immediate elimination did not mean today, but rather without delay or as soon as possible. The Government member of Egypt pointed out there was a general consensus to take immediate steps against the worst forms of child labour and that the new Convention should be a flexible instrument capable of being rapidly ratified by many member States. The Government members of China, Colombia, Cuba, India, Lebanon, Namibia, Spain and the Syrian Arab Republic supported the amendment confirming the need to urgently adopt measures to eliminate the worst forms of child labour. The Employer members also supported the amendment. The Worker members, while recognizing the support for the amendment suggested that "immediate action" was preferable to "immediate measures" and established a closer link between the Title and the wording in the Preamble and better reflected the concept of an ongoing process to eliminate the worst forms of child labour. The Government member of Ethiopia on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee opposed the subamendment, while the Government member of the Sudan supported it.

67. The Government member of the Netherlands proposed a subamendment whereby the title would read: "Proposed Convention concerning immediate measures for the prohibition and effective elimination of the worst forms of child labour", in an effort to facilitate the discussions. However, the Worker members believed such proposals weakened the intention of the instruments. They recalled the great expectations of the outside world concerning the proposed instruments and that the title should convey a strong and clear message about what the new ILO instruments intended to do about the worst forms of child labour.

68. The Government member of France agreed and reiterated the need to focus on central issues and not go back on the consensus that had been reached the previous year. She thus supported retaining the title in the Office text. The Government members of Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Italy, Norway, Poland and Uruguay also expressed their support for the existing title. In view of this show of support, the Employer members also decided to support the existing title.

69. The Government members of Spain and Rwanda continued to support the amendment proposed by the Government member of Ethiopia, as the title should make a clear statement to the public with achievable and realistic aims. The Government member of Bolivia, speaking on behalf of Colombia, Ecuador and Venezuela agreed with the Government member of Spain, believing that the instruments should be viable and achievable.

70. The Worker members reiterated their conviction that the title should convey a strong message to the world, and that the word "immediate" clearly conveyed the sense of "without delay". In the light of the strong support for retaining the original title, the Government member of the Netherlands withdrew her subamendment. A show of hands by Government members indicated majority support for maintaining the original title, but the Government member of Ethiopia stated that the members of the African Group on the Committee preferred to retain the intention of their amendment and to this end they could accept the proposal that had been made by the Worker members to replace the word "measures" by "action".

71. The Worker members stressed their wish for consensus on the aims of the instruments as did the Employer members in supporting this subamendment. The Government member of the Netherlands on behalf of several other Government members also supported it. The subamendment was adopted, as was the amendment as subamended.

72. The Title as amended was adopted.

Preamble

Preambular paragraphs 1 and 2

73. Preambular paragraphs 1 and 2 were adopted without change.

Preambular paragraph 3

74. An amendment submitted by the Employer members proposed to delete the word "effective" before "elimination" and to replace the words "with a view to achieving the total abolition of child labour" with "on child labour". Their intention was to ensure a simple, readily understood instrument. The second part of their amendment sought, in the interests of clarity, to move away from the words taken directly from the Preamble to Convention No. 138, which referred to the total abolition of child labour as defined in that Convention, but which could be misunderstood by the general public to refer to all work done by children.

75. The Government member of Canada spoke to a similar amendment, which was to be submitted by the Government members of Australia, Canada, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Portugal, San Marino, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States, to delete the words "which remain the fundamental instruments with a view to achieving the total abolition of child labour". They considered the phrase a commentary on Convention No. 138 which was unnecessary, and pointed out that no other instruments mentioned in the Preamble had such a commentary.

76. The Worker members opposed the amendment and stated that Convention No. 138 was the governing standard on child labour, which remained fundamental to child labour, and that the resolution of 1996 went to its heart. The principle it represented, the total abolition of child labour, needed to be stated for it to be adhered to.

77. The Employer members opposed the amendment proposed by the Government member of Canada and the abovementioned group of Governments, maintaining their amendment. The Government member of Egypt considered the fundamental nature of Convention No. 138 needed to be emphasized. The Government member of India argued that the Employer members' amendment oversimplified the text, as it no longer linked the aim of Convention No. 138 with any specific intention concerning child labour.

78. The Government members of Cuba, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Italy, Lebanon, South Africa and Uruguay opposed the amendments in favour of keeping the Office text. The Government member of France stated that the wording was taken directly from Convention No. 138 and that it would be strange to question such wording. Furthermore, the wording reflected the previous year's decision regarding the link between Convention No. 138 and the new Convention, which was important to recall in the Preamble. The Government member of Switzerland, supported by the Government member of Turkey, agreed with the Government member of France and noted that the Preamble was not a legally binding part of the instrument. She stated that her Government had erroneously been included on the proposed amendment submitted by Canada and the other Governments mentioned.

79. The Government members of Colombia and Hungary supported the amendment submitted by the Government member of Canada and others, stating that the key word in this paragraph was "complement". When reference was made to other international instruments in the text of a Convention, added qualifications or interpretations were not given.

80. The Government member of Canada, speaking on behalf of the Government members of Australia, Canada, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Portugal, San Marino, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom and the United States, suggested a subamendment to delete the word "the" before "fundamental instruments" in the preceding phrase in the title. The phrase in the title would thus read : "... which remain fundamental instruments on child labour, and". The Worker members agreed to support the subamendment in the interests of reaching consensus. Support was also voiced by the Government members of Argentina, Denmark, Finland, Rwanda, and Switzerland, but the Government members of Cuba, Egypt, Ethiopia, France, India and South Africa felt that the proposed subamendment would weaken the intent of the text and the reference to Convention No. 138 and Recommendation No. 146 as "the" fundamental instruments should remain. Following an appeal by the Worker members to concentrate on more substantive matters in the proposed Convention, the amendment as subamended was adopted by consensus, thus the reference read as follows: "to complement the Convention and Recommendation concerning Minimum Age for Admission to Employment, 1973, which remain fundamental instruments on child labour,".

81. The Government members of Egypt and Ethiopia withdrew an amendment to replace "national and international action" by "national action and international cooperation", in favour of the amendment being submitted next by the Government member of Morocco. The Government member of Morocco submitted an amendment to delete "and international" after "national" and to insert "international cooperation and assistance" after the word "action".

82. The insertion of "international cooperation and assistance" to replace "international action" sought to clarify which kind of international action was to be taken and the methods needed to support the efforts of the States involved to achieve the elimination of the worst forms of child labour.

83. The Employer members expressed some disagreement with the proposal, indicating that the question was covered in greater detail in Article 8 of the proposed Convention. The Worker members recognized the strong call made by several developing countries for technical and monetary support in addressing the problem of poverty eradication and elimination of the worst forms of child labour. While confirming the intent of the Workers to give considerable attention to the question of international cooperation and assistance under Article 8, the Worker members considered it unnecessary to include a similar reference in the Preamble and thus opposed the amendment.

84. The Government member of Sweden proposed a subamendment to retain the words "international action" and to insert the words "including international cooperation and assistance". The Government member of the Netherlands, speaking on behalf of the members of the Group of Industrialized Market Economies (IMEC) (Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States), supported the subamendment, as did the Government members of South Africa and the United States. The subamendment was also supported by the Worker members and the Employer members. The amendment as subamended read as follows: "as the main priority for national and international action, including international cooperation and assistance". The amendment as subamended was adopted.

85. Preambular paragraph 3 was adopted as amended.

Preambular paragraph 4

86. The Employer members submitted an amendment to delete the word "effective" before the word "elimination" to ensure consistency with the text adopted in Preambular paragraph 3. The Worker members supported the amendment. The Government member of the Netherlands, speaking on behalf of the members of the IMEC Group on the Committee, opposed the amendment stating that the provision should be consistent with the language in Article 1 of Convention No. 138. The Government members of Argentina and India also opposed the amendment. The Employer members withdrew the amendment.

87. The Worker members submitted an amendment to insert "free" before "basic education", to mention explicitly the importance of free basic education. The Government member of the Netherlands, speaking on behalf of the members of the IMEC Group on the Committee, supported the amendment. The Government members of Bolivia, Cuba, Ethiopia, India, Lebanon, Syrian Arab Republic and Venezuela supported the amendment. The Government member of Chile, also speaking on behalf of the Government members of Brazil and Uruguay, supported the amendment and added that it was consistent with Article 22 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Employer members also supported the amendment but recalled that there were countries without compulsory education systems. The amendment was adopted.

88. The Government member of Canada, speaking on behalf of Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, San Marino, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States, submitted an amendment to refer to the removal of children from "such" work, meaning from the worst forms of child labour rather than all work, and to replace the word "reintegration" with the word "integration", since many of the children engaged in the worst forms of child labour had not yet been integrated into society.

89. The Employer members supported the amendment, while the Worker members supported the change to "integration", but opposed the insertion of "such" work. The Worker Vice-Chairperson referred to cases in which child workers had been removed from one "worst form" only to find themselves in another and emphasized the objective of creating the necessary environment for rehabilitation and educational opportunities and other integrative measures. To address these concerns the Government member of Sweden proposed a subamendment to insert the word "all" before the words "such work", which was supported by the Government member of the United States and by the Employer members. The Worker Vice-Chairperson stated that the Worker members would accept the subamendment in the spirit of compromise and emphasized that there was a measure of protection ensured because the new Convention was in the context of Convention No. 138, which protected children and provided for minimum ages. The Government members of Argentina, Cuba and Venezuela suggested that a better definition was needed in Spanish which would be addressed by the Drafting Committee. The amendment as subamended was adopted.

90. The Worker members submitted an amendment to add "while supporting the needs of their families" at the end of the paragraph. The needs of the families of children engaged in the worst forms of child labour needed to be taken into account to ensure that well-intended actions did not have unintended and harmful consequences.

91. The Employer members stated that they were not against the suggestion but questioned the usefulness of the amendment since social integration encompassed a wide range of actions, including support to families.

92. The Government members of Ethiopia and India supported the amendment. The Government member of Sweden supported the idea, but suggested "taking into account" rather than "supporting" as one could speak of support to families or of taking their needs into account, but not of supporting their needs.

93. The Worker members opposed the subamendment as it changed the meaning of the proposed amendment.

94. The Government member of the Netherlands, speaking on behalf of the Government members of Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Japan, Luxemburg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, San Marino, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States, supported the subamendment as did the Government members of Egypt, Pakistan and Venezuela, as it made the point more clear. To meet the concerns of the Worker members, however the Government member of the United States suggested an alternative might be to replace "supporting" with "addressing" or with "while responding to the needs of".

95. The Government member of Argentina was concerned that it might imply that Governments were under an obligation to provide subsidies to the families of children in the worst forms of child labour and also pointed out that there were children without families. The Government member of Venezuela also referred to the problem of street children who had no families.

96. The Worker members agreed to the proposal to replace "supporting" with "addressing". The Employer members also supported it. The subamendment was adopted as was the amendment as subamended.

97. The Government member of Pakistan expressed concern regarding the implications for implementation, particularly economic. The Government member of Bolivia shared the same concern. The Government member of Hungary pointed out that the Preamble was not a legally binding part of the text, and so there were no implications for implementation.

98. Preambular paragraph 4 was adopted as amended and read as follows:

Considering that the effective elimination of the worst forms of child labour requires immediate and comprehensive action, taking into account the importance of free basic education and the need to remove the concerned children from all such work and to provide for their rehabilitation and social integration, while addressing the needs of their families.

Proposed new Preambular paragraph
after Preambular paragraph 4

99. The members of the African Group on the Committee, and the Government members of Australia, China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Republic of Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, Pakistan and Singapore submitted identical amendments to insert a new Preambular paragraph 5, to read: "Recognizing that child labour is to a great extent caused by poverty and that the long-term solution lies in sustained economic growth leading to social progress, in particular poverty alleviation and universal education, and".

100. The Government member of Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, explained that a reference to poverty was not an excuse for inaction, but a recognition of the reasons for child labour. Poverty and social deprivation had contributed immensely to the increase in child labour, particularly in Africa, and the amendment was submitted to reflect the fact that poverty was a principal causal factor of child labour. This was indicated in the resolution concerning the elimination of child labour adopted at the 83th Session of the International Labour Conference in 1996, from which the text of the amendment had been taken.

101. The Government member of India, speaking on behalf of the majority of members of the Asia-Pacific Group on the Committee, echoed the sentiments of the Government member of Ethiopia, and added that whilst some of the worst forms of child labour were a consequence of the denial of political and civil rights, others such as those defined as hazardous work, were frequently rooted in poverty and socio-economic circumstances, including inadequacy of resources to provide for economic and social rights. It was not a question of making excuses. Poverty could not justify the denial of any human rights, but was frequently a reason for their absence from the lives of countless millions as economic and social rights could only be promoted and secured progressively.

102. The Employer members stated that there were concerns about the complex relationship between poverty and child labour and its worst forms, but after a long debate the previous year it had been decided that it was inappropriate for poverty to be linked in this manner to the elimination of the worst forms of child labour. Moreover, there had been support for a short and concise Preamble. However, the issue had grown in importance since the first discussion and the Employer members were not opposed to its inclusion in some form.

103. The Worker members stated that poverty was both a cause and a consequence of the worst forms of child labour. It was inappropriate to lift one paragraph from the 1996 resolution concerning the elimination of child labour. It would be more appropriate to mention the resolution itself.

104. The Government member of the United States commented that the interrelationship between poverty and child labour was complex and still not well understood and that the proposed amendment did not capture that complexity. If one were to address, permit or explain the existence of child labour as a response to poverty, there would be both poverty and child labour for ever. He suggested it would be better to say that child labour was "both a cause and a consequence of poverty" rather than "to a great extent caused by poverty" and that the long-term solution "includes" rather than "lies in" economic growth. He opposed including a reference to the resolution in the Preamble; it was counter to keeping the Preamble short and the debate on the elimination of child labour had advanced considerably since adoption of that resolution.

105. The Worker Vice-Chairperson reiterated that certain aspects of child labour had to be eliminated without delay and for which poverty was not an excuse. The Government member of the Netherlands recalled the Worker members' earlier suggestion that the Preamble refer to the full 1996 resolution on the elimination of child labour, while the Government member of Ethiopia disagreed as the members of the African Group on the Committee had wished to refer in particular to poverty eradication and not in its place to the resolution in general. The Government member of India agreed with the Government member of Ethiopia.

Proposed new paragraphs after Preambular
paragraph 4, Preambular paragraph 5,
a proposed new paragraph after Preambular
paragraph 5, Preambular paragraphs 6 and 7
and Preambular paragraph 8

106. Considerable discussion followed on how to reconcile the various view points. The Government member of India presented a proposal which incorporated a number of changes that had been agreed upon by many Government members, and by the Employer and Worker members as a result of consultations. The proposal consisted of:

(a) a specific reference to the 1996 resolution concerning the elimination of child labour;

(b) the adoption of the amendment submitted by the Government member of Ethiopia, on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, to include the following new Preambular paragraph:

"Recognizing that child labour is to a great extent caused by poverty and that the long-term solution lies in sustained economic growth leading to social progress, in particular poverty alleviation and universal education, and".

(c) the adoption of the amendment presented by the Government members of Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, San Marino, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States, to add a new Preambular paragraph after paragraph 5 recalling the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up;

(d) the adoption of amendments submitted by the Employer members to delete Preambular paragraphs 7 and 8;

(e) withdrawal of an amendment by the Government members of China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Republic of Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan and Papua New Guinea to include a paragraph from the 1996 resolution on the international community addressing the root cause of child labour, and;

(f) withdrawal of the amendment by the Government members of Australia, China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Republic of Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea and Singapore to add a paragraph from the 1996 resolution on the shared responsibility for the progressive elimination of child labour.

107. The Worker Vice-Chairperson expressed support for the composite proposal. He stated the Worker members' intention to submit an amendment at an appropriate point in the body of the text which would give effect to the provisions of the Convention to enhance international cooperation and assistance, including support for social and economic development, for poverty eradication and for universal education.

108. The Government member of Lebanon stated she was favourable to the maintaining of the reference in Preambular paragraph 8 to the Copenhagen Summit on Social Development. The Government member of Uruguay, speaking also on behalf of the Government member of Chile, expressed concern about the Spanish text and stated that she preferred maintaining a reference to the Copenhagen Declaration on Social Development and the Programme of Action of the World Summit for Social Development, 1995, and the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action of the Fourth World Conference on Women, 1995 in Preambular paragraph 8. Not having the text of the 1996 resolution in front of her she did not know whether that resolution made reference to those instruments, but if it did, then she would accept the proposal.

109. The Government member of the Netherlands, on behalf of the members of the IMEC Group on the Committee, indicated their support. The Government member of Ethiopia, on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, stated their agreement but noted that they agreed to delete Preambular paragraph 8 only because it was part of the entire proposal. The Government member of Mexico declared her surprise that references to gender issues, in particular to the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action of the Fourth World Conference on Women, 1995 were being deleted from the text. In response, the Worker members maintained that gender issues were taken into account by referring to the 1996 resolution and the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up and there should be no implication that they were not aware and supportive of gender issues. The Government member of Pakistan reluctantly agreed with the proposal. She made it clear that accepting the reference to the Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up did not change her Government's position on the Declaration that had been stated at the time of its adoption.

110. The changes noted in (a) to (f) above were adopted by consensus with the following effect.

111. A new Preambular paragraph after paragraph 4 was adopted: "Recalling the resolution concerning the elimination of child labour adopted at the 83rd Session of the International Labour Conference in 1996".

112. A second new Preambular paragraph after paragraph 4 was adopted: "Recognizing that child labour is to a great extent caused by poverty and that the long-term solution lies in sustained economic growth leading to social progress, in particular poverty alleviation and universal education, and".

113. Preambular paragraph 5 was adopted without change.

114. A new Preambular paragraph after paragraph 5 was adopted: "Recalling the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up, adopted by the International Labour Conference in 1998,".

115. Preambular paragraph 6 was adopted without change.

116. Preambular paragraph 7 was deleted.

117. Preambular paragraph 8 was deleted.

Preambular paragraph 9

118. The Employer members withdrew their amendment to add "the worst forms of" before the word "child", in view of the fact that the Conference agenda item was on child labour.

119. Preambular paragraph 9 was adopted without change.

Preambular paragraph 10

120. Preambular paragraph 10 was adopted without change.

Preambular paragraph 11

121. Three amendments concerning the short title of the proposed Convention were discussed together. The Government member of Ethiopia and other Government members of the African Group on the Committee proposed replacing the word "Abolition" by the words "Measures for the Elimination", to be consistent with the long title. The Government members of Australia, China, India, Indonesia, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, Pakistan and Singapore proposed to insert the words "and effective action for" after the word "immediate". The Employer members proposed to replace the words "Immediate Abolition" by the words "Prohibition and Elimination".

122. The Government member of the Netherlands, on behalf of a number of the members of the IMEC Group on the Committee, and the Government members of Cuba and Uruguay supported retaining the full title which had been agreed upon in this part of the text as well, rather than having a different short title. The Government member of Sweden stated that it was customary for the Conference to adopt a short title and proposed a subamendment so that the proposed Convention would be referred to as the the "Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999"; this was seconded by the Government member of Pakistan. The Legal Adviser stated that for the sake of convenience it had been customary since the 1920s for international labour standards to be known by shorter titles. The official title reflected the content of a Convention and the short title was used in the list of titles of Conventions and in documents.123. The Employer members, the Worker members and the Government members of Argentina, Bolivia, Finland and Lebanon supported the subamendment. After an indicative show of hands, the subamendment was adopted which replaced the three pending amendments.

124. Preambular paragraph 11 was adopted as amended.

125. The Government members of Egypt and Pakistan expressed their reservations about the reference to international action, as this reference could lend itself to misinterpretation or abuse. They stated that this reference could only be understood in conjunction with Article 8.

126. The Preamble was adopted as amended.

Article 1

127. The Worker members submitted an amendment to provide that "all necessary and effective" measures would be required. The addition would signal in stronger language the need for concrete action. The amendment was supported by the Government members of Argentina and Finland but opposed by the Employer members and the Government member of the Netherlands. A discussion ensued, taking into account several other amendments submitted to this Article concerning the deletion or placement of "immediate" and whether measures should be "effective".

128. After consultations, the Government member of the Netherlands proposed a subamendment which inserted the words "immediate and effective" before "measures", deleted the word "immediate" before "elimination" and added at the end of the Article the words "as a matter of urgency.". The Article as subamended thus would read: "Each member which ratifies this Convention shall take immediate and effective measures to secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour as a matter of urgency." The subamendment was supported by the Employer members and the Worker members. Following an indicative show of support, the subamendment was adopted. The amendment as subamended was adopted.

129. Article 1 was adopted as amended.

Proposal concerning Articles 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7
of the proposed Convention and Paragraph 3
and a new Paragraph 4 of the proposed
Recommendation

130. Given the number of important issues represented by the amendments submitted to Articles 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 of the proposed Convention, the Committee decided to allow time for extensive group meetings and an informal tripartite working group to work toward consensus on a number of key issues in these Articles, in particular, the age of children to which the Convention would apply, the definition of hazardous work, the determination of hazardous work (Article 4 of the Convention and Paragraph 3 of the Recommendation), the explicit inclusion of children in armed conflict, the role of education in Article 3 and Article 7, and the role of NGOs or other members of civil society. As a result of the consultations, the Government member of Australia presented a comprehensive proposal which included amendments agreed upon by many Government members and by the Employer and Worker members. These proposed amendments related to Articles 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 of the proposed Convention and Paragraph 3 and a proposed new Paragraph 4 in the proposed Recommendation. The proposal was as follows:

(a) No amendment to Article 2;

(b) Article 3, subparagraph (a): after the words "of children" replace the existing text with the words "debt bondage and serfdom and forced or compulsory labour, including forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict;";

(d) Article 4, paragraph 1: replace the words "taking into account" with the words "fully taking into consideration" and add after the words "international standards" the words "in particular Paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Recommendation [on the worst forms of child labour];

(e) Article 4, paragraph 3: replace the word "after" with the word "in";

(f) Article 6, paragraph 2: add at the end of the paragraph the following words: "taking into consideration the views of other concerned groups as appropriate.";

(g) Article 7, paragraph 2, subparagraph (b): after "removal", replace the words "from work" with the words "from the worst forms of child labour"; and delete the following words at the end of the subparagraph: "through, inter alia, access to free basic education";

(h) Article 7, paragraph 2: insert a new subparagraph (c) as follows: "ensure access to free basic education and, wherever possible and appropriate, vocational training, for all children removed from the worst forms of child labour;";

(i) Paragraph 3 of the proposed Recommendation: replace the words "as a minimum" with the words "inter alia";

(j) Paragraph 3, subparagraph (a): replace the word "emotional" with the word "psychological";

(k) Paragraph 3, subparagraph (e): replace the words "which does not allow for the possibility of returning home each day" with the words "where the child is unreasonably confined to the premises of the employer.";

(l) After Paragraph 3, insert a new Paragraph under the title "Hazardous Work", as follows:

Notwithstanding Article 2 of the Convention, for the types of work referred to under Article 3(d) of the Convention, national laws or regulations, or the competent authority, may, after consultation with the workers' and employers' organizations concerned, authorize employment or work as from the age of 16 years, on condition that the health, safety and morals of the children concerned are fully protected, and that the young persons have received adequate specific instruction or vocational training in the relevant branch of activity.

131. The Committee agreed that it accepted the principle of the proposal coming from the informal working group and that it would be considered as a whole. Before the specific provisions of the proposal from the informal working group were considered, several members commented on the proposal. The Employer members and the Worker members supported the proposal. Nevertheless, the Worker members were concerned about a number of points. Regarding the issue of children in armed conflict, some Worker members -- notably the members from the Americas -- were very disappointed with the manner in which it was proposed to deal with this most hazardous form of child labour. They felt that an injustice was being done to children by not having a broader provision for all children in armed conflict and that it would be necessary to return to this issue because wars would continue. The Worker members were also concerned about a reference in Article 6 to "other concerned groups as appropriate". They were reluctant to agree with its inclusion because they considered some governments were responsible for the repression of trade unions and deaths of some trade unionists and were more open to consulting with NGOs than trade unions. They felt that "other concerned groups" should mean groups sincerely committed to the abolition of the worst forms of child labour. The Worker Vice-Chairperson proposed a subamendment to the proposal for Article 4, paragraph 1, namely, to delete the word "fully".

132. The Government member of the Netherlands, speaking on behalf of the members of the IMEC Group on the Committee, and the Government member of India, speaking on behalf of the members of the Asia-Pacific Group on the Committee, and the Government member of Guatemala, speaking on behalf of the members of the Latin American Group on the Committee, supported in principle the proposal but requested legal advice on various issues. The Government member of Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, supported the proposal and welcomed the deletion of the word "fully" suggested by the Worker members. Regarding the issue of children in armed conflict, the Government member of Ethiopia stated that the proposal did not reflect the views of the members of the African Group on the Committee concerning children in armed conflict, which they considered the most hazardous and injurious form of child labour.

133. The Government member of Australia, on behalf of the members of the informal working group, posed several questions to the Legal Adviser that had been raised by members of the Committee during consultations. First, regarding Article 4, paragraph 1, he questioned the effect of the reference to Paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Recommendation in this provision of the Convention. Second, also referring to Article 4, paragraph 1, he asked what was meant by "relevant international standards". Third, referring to Article 4, paragraph 3, and the use of the phrase "in consultation with", he sought advice on what was required of ratifying member States. Finally, he wanted clarification on the links between Article 3(a) of the proposed Convention concerning the worst forms of child labour and the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) and what the legal requirements and obligations were for member States that ratified the proposed Convention.

134. The Government member of Egypt presented a further question to the Legal Adviser regarding the new Paragraph proposed for the Recommendation starting with "Notwithstanding Article 2 of the Convention,". He questioned whether it was legally correct to include in a Recommendation an exception to an Article in a Convention.

135. Concerning the question on the nature of the obligation arising from a reference to a Recommendation in a Convention, the Deputy Legal Adviser stated that though it was infrequent, a number of international labour Conventions made such references to ILO Recommendations as well as to United Nations Recommendations. He explained that such references did not make it mandatory for Governments to comply with the provisions of the Recommendations, and that in this case, it was a procedural obligation to take into consideration the contents of the Recommendation in question. The content of a Recommendation did not become binding by such reference. With regard to which international instruments were relevant, the representative of the Legal Adviser said that these were too numerous to list, but for example there were standards concerning toxic substances, dangerous processes, heavy weight, night work and so on. Such reference did not oblige member States that had not ratified these instruments to comply with them, merely to take them into account. Regarding the question on the meaning of "in consultation with", he stated that the obligation to consult was commonly included in international labour standards and was an element of the decision-making process. Under such a provision, Governments were obliged to consult with the social partners before a decision was taken but were not obliged by the result of the consultation. However, Governments had to consult and to consider the elements discussed in good faith because consultation without consideration would not respect the spirit of the obligation. He noted that the difference between "in" consultation with and "after" consultation with was minimal, and reflected the discontinuous (after) or the continuous (in) character of the consultative process.

136. Referring to the link between Article 3(a) and Convention No. 29, he stated that each Convention was autonomous and unless there was a specific reference they remained autonomous. He noted that the definition of forced labour contained in Article 2 of Convention No. 29 remained valid for the purposes of the proposed Convention unless it defined the term differently. Convention No. 29 did not define debt bondage and serfdom, which were defined in United Nations instruments. Regarding the proposed new Paragraph after Paragraph 3 in the Recommendation, he stated that the text before the Committee could not be included in the Recommendation as drafted, because a Recommendation could not create derogation to an obligation contained in a Convention. He stated that the Employer and Worker members had agreed to modify the text accordingly. The proposed new wording was as follows: "For the types of work referred to under Article 3(d) of the Convention and Paragraph 3 of the Recommendation, national laws or regulations, or the competent authority, could, after consultation with the workers' and employers' organizations concerned, authorize employment or work as from the age of 16 years, on condition that the health, safety and morals of the children concerned are fully protected, and that the young persons have received adequate specific instruction or vocational training in the relevant branch of activity."

137. The Government member of Argentina requested legal advice concerning the proposed text of Article 3(a) in relation to the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) as Convention No. 29 made an exception for military service.

138. A representative of the Legal Adviser stated that Convention No. 29 did not exclude all compulsory military service, and that work carried out by conscripts for non-military purposes was considered as forced labour prohibited under Convention No. 29. The definition of forced or compulsory labour under Convention No. 29 did not specifically refer to "forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict". Therefore, it would be clearer if the word "and" were used in Article 3(a) instead of the word "including". Nevertheless, it was for the Committee to decide.

139. The Government member of Hungary stated his objections to the working methods of the Committee. He considered them inefficient, undemocratic and irregular. Some member States were effectively excluded from group representation as they did not readily belong to a particular informal government group, as these were determined primarily by geographical considerations. Furthermore, he felt such attachment to groups should be voluntary. He hoped a precedent was not being set for the Committee's future work as much remained to be discussed in plenary sittings of the Committee. He considered that decisions regarding what should be included or excluded from the text should be made in plenary, not in small informal groups, which had the additional disadvantage of denying the social partners the opportunity of hearing the arguments and counter-arguments of their counterparts. Finally, he stressed the importance of discussion in plenary, so as to ensure a record of the decisions taken, which was necessary for future interpretation of the instruments after their adoption and ratification. The Government member of Lebanon expressed her concern that the working methods were depriving the delegates of the opportunity to express their views and to seek clarification especially if the package deal were not to be further discussed in the Committee plenary.

140. The Worker Vice-Chairperson strongly objected to the assessment of the Government member of Hungary. He stated that all the groups had arrived at proposals to amend the texts only after full consultation with the members of their individual groups and that Government members did have the opportunity to state their positions in plenary. He stated that the Worker members were participating in working methods which promoted open and frank discussion in an informal forum and which were aimed at reaching consensus on very important issues in the proposed Convention and Recommendation. This consensus was critical to achieving wide support for the instruments, rapid ratification and effective implementation.

141. The Government member of Australia indicated that there were still a number of questions on which clarification was sought from the Legal Adviser. Five issues appeared to be most important: first, to clarify the meaning of the term "other concerned groups" in light of the tripartite nature of the ILO; second, to explain whether in Article 3 the use of language addressing criminal acts of adults would present a legal difficulty in view of the intention to define the worst forms of child labour; third, to explore the implications of the draft provision in the proposal to Article 3(a) on forced or compulsory recruitment of children in armed conflict for member States which allowed compulsory military service as of the age of 17, particularly in the event of armed conflict or military intervention; fourth, to clarify the implications of Article 2 for member States with legislation defining differently the age bracket of childhood; and lastly, to explain whether, in view of Articles 2 and 3(d) of the proposed Convention, ratifying member States would be able to invoke the flexiblility provision set out in a proposed new Paragraph 4 of the Recommendation when determining the types of work as provided for in Article 4, paragraph 1.

142. Other Government members had further questions. The Government member of Colombia asked whether the stipulation of Article 4 to consult with workers' and employers' organizations would be binding. The Government member of the Russian Federation sought clarification as to whether there were rules in the ILO or an established practice which would attach particular importance to the views of the Legal Adviser on the draft instruments, as compared to other legal interpretations, especially in cases of draft international treaties.

143. In responding, the Deputy Legal Adviser explained that the draft instruments, as amended, did not spell out the meaning of "other concerned groups". These could, for example, be parents' organizations, children's associations or organizations for the defence of children. A number of other Conventions, such as the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (Disabled Persons) Convention, 1983 (No. 159) and the Minimum Wage Fixing Convention, 1970 (No. 131) included similar references to other concerned groups or qualified persons. The above notwithstanding, Article 6, paragraph 2, fully respected the role of the tripartite constituents and accorded them a clear priority in the consultation process. In responding to the related question of the Government member of Colombia, he explained that while Article 4, paragraph 1, would make it binding for ratifying member States to include the social partners in the process leading up to a decision, the decision itself would be taken by the Government only. On the question regarding legal difficulties arising from the language used in Article 3 to address criminal acts by adults, he explained by example. Children making bricks in conditions of debt bondage were engaged in a worst form of child labour and were victims of it; whereas the adult who put them to such work was a criminal profiting from such work. In regard to the question of children recruited for lawful compulsory military service at the age of 17 and their potential participation in armed conflict, he noted that this was a very hypothetical question. ILO Conventions were universal texts expressed in general terms and as such could not envisage all possible situations that might occur. The purpose of the proposal on Article 3(a) was to cover forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict. This was all that could be said from a legal point of view. Concerning the issue of potential conflict of the draft Convention's definition of "child" with existing national legislation, the Legal Adviser recalled that Article 2 of the draft Convention stipulated only that the term "child" should apply to all persons under the age of 18 for the purposes of this Convention. It did not matter which designation national law gave to persons under the age of 18, on the understanding that all such persons were covered by the proposed Convention. Moreover, Article 2 corresponded to the definition of "child" in Article 1 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child which was almost universally ratified. Regarding the last question expressed by the Government member of Australia, Article 4, paragraph 1, provided flexibility in that the determination of types of work was left to the discretion of member States subject to two procedural requirements, namely consultation with employers' and workers' organizations concerned and the need to take into consideration relevant international standards. The latter would not imply any obligation to ratify or respect the relevant standards. Additionally, there was the requirement to make the determination in good faith consistent with the obligation on ratifying States under the international law of treaties to implement in good faith the Conventions that they ratify.

144. In responding to the question raised by the Government member of the Russian Federation concerning whether there were any rules or established procedure of the Organization which attached any particular significance to the opinion of the Legal Adviser in view of other rules of interpretation of international treaties, the Legal Adviser referred to Article 63, paragraph 2(f), of the Standing Orders which provided for the possibility of a motion to ask for the opinion of the Legal Adviser. He also pointed out that the Legal Adviser served exclusively the Conference during its duration, and not the Office.

145. The Government member of Cuba stressed the importance of reconciling the language used in Article 3(a) with regard to criminal acts and the definition of the worst forms of child labour. She noted that the activities of the children subject to sale and trafficking of children, for example, were not child labour but crimes against children. She also voiced concern that the draft provision of Article 3 on children in armed conflict which, she thought, had a very limited scope, could contradict Article 38 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, and jeopardize the ongoing discussions on the draft optional protocol to that Convention on the involvement of children in armed conflicts. The Government member of Colombia expressed similar concerns.

146. The Government member of Lebanon questioned whether the legal obligations under Article 3(a) differed in the case of voluntary recruitment. The Government member of Hungary suggested that it was for the Committee to interpret what it meant in view of the Legal Adviser's statement, not for the Legal Adviser to tell the Committee what the Committee meant.

147. Many Government members expressed satisfaction with the Legal Adviser's explanations.

148. The Committee examined as a whole the particular provisions and Articles affected by the proposal in the proposed Convention, which were Articles 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7. The discussions on Article 5 and Article 8, though occurring in non-sequential order, are reported below in the order of the Articles in the Convention.

Article 2

149. An amendment by the Employer members to insert "Exclusively" at the beginning of the Article was withdrawn. The Government member of India announced the withdrawal of an amendment submitted by the Government members of India, Indonesia, Lebanon, Malaysia and Pakistan to take account of Article 3 of Convention No. 138. The decision was made on the basis that Article 3, subparagraph (d) and Article 4, paragraph 1, provided for a national determination of hazardous work which would constitute the worst forms of child labour.

150. Article 2 was adopted without change.

Article 3(a)

151. The Government member of the United States sought the understanding of the Committee on some important points. He indicated that the text that referred to the "forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict" as a worst form of child labour proposed under Article 3(a) was a most important and positive addition to the Convention. It addressed effectively an essential concern: the abduction, coercion, and forced or involuntary recruitment of children for use as participants in armed conflict. The adoption of the above text would make the Convention stronger and would significantly strengthen current international standards concerning forced or compulsory enlistment. It would in no way undermine other international standards on the subject. He stated that the United States and some other countries permitted the lawful recruitment of 17-year-olds to volunteer -- with parental consent -- to serve in the armed forces, including when armed conflict was regrettably necessary. He did not believe that such voluntary enlistment in lawful national military service was the basis of the concern which had resulted in this text.

152. He noted that there was no other obligation related to genuine service in armed forces, and/or lawful national military service contained or contemplated under Article 3(d) on hazardous work. In summarizing his intervention, the Government member of the United States requested the Committee's confirmation of the abovementioned understanding on two points that: Article 3(a) did not apply to 16- and 17-year-olds who lawfully volunteered for service in a nation's armed forces, and that Article 3(d) covering "hazardous work" did not impose any additional obligation in regard to the engagement of children in lawful military activities.

153. The Deputy Legal Adviser confirmed that the statements made by the Government member of the United States were not in contradiction with what he had said earlier concerning the scope of Article 3(a) (forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict) and the relation between Articles 3(d) and 4, paragraph 1, of the proposed Convention.

154. The Government member of Norway, speaking on behalf of the Government members of Canada, Denmark, France, Italy, Mexico, Spain and Uruguay, stressed the importance of providing the utmost protection for children. Speaking to an amendment that would regard all involvement of children in armed conflict as a worst form of child labour, she argued that a restrictive formulation introduced the question of how to determine whether participation is truly voluntary or involuntary and how to protect the children involved. She expressed disappointment and deep regret for the impossibility of providing a basic level of protection to this group of children. However, she believed that an explicit reference to children in armed conflict in the new ILO instrument was a positive step both towards the protection of children and in strengthening the ILO's mandate on this subject. In the interest of consensus and with the expectation that this issue would be addressed in a comprehensive manner in the context of the draft optional protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict, the amendment was withdrawn.

155. The Government member of Cuba, speaking on behalf of the Government members of Egypt, Guatemala, India and Venezuela, withdrew an amendment to Article 3(a), to insert the words "for any purpose or in any form" after the words "the sale and trafficking of children".

156. The Government members of Australia, Austria, Belgium, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Luxemburg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Portugal, San Marino, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States had submitted an amendment to replace the existing text after the words "of children" with the words "debt bondage and serfdom and forced or compulsory labour, including the forced or compulsory use of children in military activities;". The Government member of the Netherlands, speaking on behalf of the Government members sponsoring the amendment, withdrew it in favour of the text in the proposal and said that this question should continue to be discussed in other relevant United Nations fora, particularly by the Working group on the draft optional protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflicts.

157. The Government member of Switzerland supported the consensus solution regarding an explicit mention of children involved in armed conflict. She believed that an explicit reference to child soldiers in the new Convention was appropriate and the recruitment and involvement of children in armed conflict could be defined as a worst form of child labour. Switzerland confirmed its commitment to work for a ban on involvement of persons under the age of 18 in armed conflicts, inter alia in the Working group of the United Nations on the draft optional protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflicts. The Government member of Hungary shared the same view.

158. The Worker members stated their position on this question, namely, that there should be no war at all. Money spent on warheads and instruments of destruction should instead be used to help develop humankind. Children in particular should not be exposed to this unnecessary evil. However, the Worker members had made a concession in the interest of consensus in order to address the needs of the children who required the most immediate help and concerted attention.

159. The Government member of the Russian Federation, while indicating support for the consensus solution, expressed his disappointment with the proposed wording. The text excluded only the forced or compulsory recruitment of all children and, most importantly, did not prevent the actual participation by and use of all children in armed conflicts. He signalled that the appearance of this wording in an international Convention could jeopardize the work on the draft optional protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflicts.

160. The Government member of the United States noted that there had been no objections to the understandings as expressed in his previous statement, understood that the Committee concurred, and on that basis he was prepared to move forward.

161. The Government member of Cuba supported the statement that had been made by the Worker members concerning the wasted resources on war and arms races and confirmed her Government's commitment to put the interests of children first. She reiterated that the issue of children in armed conflict was being discussed in the Human Rights Commission in a wide, precise and detailed manner, as the matter was more pertinent. She further emphasized that, in honour of the highest interest of childhood in Cuba, she hoped that no more military aggression would put Cuban children in danger.

162. The Government member of France expressed deep regret that the text of the proposal did not bar involvement in armed conflicts of volunteers below the age of 18. She felt that the appropriate instrument for extending protection to this very vulnerable category of children was the draft optional protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflicts and hoped that the discussions on this ILO Convention would not hamper work in other United Nations fora.

163. Article 3(a) as amended by the proposal from the informal working group was adopted to read as follows: "all forms of slavery or practices similar to slavery, such as the sale and trafficking of children, debt bondage and serfdom and forced or compulsory labour, including forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict;".

Article 3(b)

164. The Government members of Denmark, Finland, Germany, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom had submitted an amendment to replace the word "use" with the word "exploitation". The Government member of the United Kingdom withdrew the amendment but noted that her Government would have preferred the word "exploitation" which would have made it clearer that the use of a child prostitute by a client was covered where it amounted to exploitation. She considered that the existing wording, "use for prostitution", did not cover the use by a client of a child prostitute, only the use made of the child by the procurer for prostitution. The Government member of Germany supported the withdrawal of the amendment but noted that she assumed the word "use" would also cover the use by a client if the child was below the national age of sexual consent.

165. Article 3(b) was adopted without change.

Article 3(c)

166. The Government member of Canada, on behalf of the Government members of Canada, Ireland, Japan, Netherlands and Spain, withdrew an amendment to delete the words "for illicit activities, in particular" and after the words "international treaties" to insert the words "and for other illegal activities". They had proposed the amendment because they preferred retaining the word "illegal" which they considered provided a clearer definition.

167. Article 3(c) was adopted without change.

Article 3, proposed new subparagraph
after Article 3(c)

168. Several amendments were submitted to add a new subparagraph on the issue of children in armed conflict. As this had been discussed and included as part of the agreed proposal including Article 3(a), several members of the Committee withdrew amendments. The Worker members withdrew an amendment to add "the use, procuring or offering of a child for armed conflict;". Likewise the Government member of Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee withdrew an amendment to include "the recruitment for and the use of children in armed conflicts;". The Government member of Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, stated that the participation of children in armed conflicts and their exposure to such violence denied children their basic rights including the right to life, education, family care and a peaceful environment. This form of child labour or employment resulted in children being killed, injured and seriously traumatized. This grave situation seriously affected the activities in which the child victims lived and rendered post-conflict rehabilitation and peace-building even more daunting. For these reasons, the members of the African Group on the Committee had proposed a clear and direct prohibition on the participation of children in armed conflict. He noted that the formulation in the proposal before the Committee did not include all aspects of the problem they had sought to address and they were disappointed by that. However, in a spirit of understanding and consensus building, the amendment was withdrawn. He also noted that the compromise adopted on this issue did not adversely affect the ongoing work in the United Nations towards the adoption of the draft optional protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on involvement of children in armed conflicts.

169. The Government member of Canada, speaking on behalf of the Government members of Canada, Denmark, France, Italy, Mexico, Norway, Spain and Uruguay, also withdrew an amendment to include "the use of children to participate in hostilities in an armed conflict;". She supported the statement made by the Government member of Norway in the discussion on Article 3(a).

170. The Worker members had proposed the inclusion of a new subparagraph to read: "work which, by its nature or circumstances in which it is carried out, systematically denies a child access to basic education." They noted that most Government and Employer members had in principle supported the principle that a child denied access to basic education was denied the ability to develop. However, in view of the practical difficulties experienced by children in some countries, for instance, merely surviving, they withdrew the amendment, though they retained their conviction on this issue.

Article 3(d)

171. The Employer members withdrew an amendment to replace the words "is likely to jeopardize" with the words "will harm".The Government member of Spain requested clarification on the meaning of the phrase "likely to harm". He referred to the Spanish translation and wanted to know the degree of probability expressed by the word "likely". The Employer Vice-Chairperson stated that "likely to" referred to probability and "may" referred to possibility. Thus, Spain stated that the translation should be "probable" and should be reviewed by the Drafting Committee. The Government member of Uruguay referred to the use of the word "other" in the Spanish text that was not included in the English. This was also referred to the Drafting Committee.

172. The Employer members stated that they wanted to make it clear that the proposed Convention should not require governments to intervene in situations in which children worked for their parents on bona fide family farms or holdings. The Employer members recognized that there could be instances in which children were employed on farms that were not bona fide family farms. In such situations parents had little or no control over working conditions and therefore could not protect their children from abuse and exploitation. There could also be situations in which title to, or effective control of, land was held by a family, but the family employed children who were also subject to abusive working conditions. These latter situations -- unlike bona fide family farms and holdings -- were intended to be addressed by this Convention.

173. The Worker Vice-Chairperson noted that this reference to sectoral coverage, though meant as an understanding of the Employers for the record, posed some concern. The Worker members recognized that there were differences between bona fide family farms and those farms that misused that title and in effect were not family and thus engaging workers, including children, in contradiction of standards for good working conditions. The proposed Convention should not be interpreted in any way to allow the abuse of children by not extending coverage to such situations. The Worker members distinguished family farms that did not interfere with children's schooling and which were truly within a protected family environment. In some countries there were farms of hundreds of acres which were exploiting non-related persons and were still referred to as family farms.

174. The Government member of India, speaking on behalf of the Government members of Australia, China, India, Japan, Republic of Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand, referred to their amendment to delete the remaining text after the words "carried out", and to replace it with the words: "is hazardous to the health, safety or morals of children, as determined by national laws or regulations, or by the competent authority, after consultation with the organizations of employers and workers concerned, taking into account relevant international standards." They had intended to unify the content of Article 3(d) and Article 4, paragraph 1, and preferred the word "jeopardize" to the word "harm". However, as their concerns were met by the text of the agreed proposal they withdrew the amendment.

175. The Government member of Sweden, speaking on behalf of the Government members of Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Turkey and United States, referred to a similar amendment to delete the remaining text after the word "circumstances", and to replace it with the words: "is determined by national laws or regulations, or by the competent authority, taking into account relevant international standards, after consultation with the organizations of employers and workers concerned, as likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children." The amendment was withdrawn in favour of the agreed proposal for this Article.

176. The Worker members withdrew an amendment which would have moved Paragraph 3 of the proposed Recommendation into this Article, with the addition of "(f) work where the child is delivered to and wholly dependent on the employer". However, as the agreed proposal contained a reference to this Paragraph, they could withdraw it.

177. Article 3(d) was adopted as amended to read as follows: "work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children."

Article 3, proposed new subparagrap
after subparagraph (d)

178. An amendment submitted by the Government members of Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, San Marino, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States to insert after subparagraph (d) a new subparagraph to read: "work which systematically deprives children of access to education in accordance with applicable compulsory education requirements as established by national laws or regulations or by the competent authority." was withdrawn by the Government member of the Netherlands speaking on behalf of the co-sponsors. She noted that the amendment was being withdrawn with some regret as the co-sponsors would have preferred the definition of hazardous work to include a reference to the denial of access to basic education. The Government member of Switzerland supported the comments of the Government member of the Netherlands.

179. The Government member of India stated that his Government attached a great deal of importance to free, basic education. However, the amendment would have made the Convention unimplementable and unratifiable as it would have expanded the scope of the Convention to virtually all forms of child labour which were rooted in poverty, as all working children in these circumstances were unable to attend school. To do so would be tantamount to imposing sanctions on poverty, while ignoring the fact that economic and social rights such as free basic education were achievable only progressively and in a developmental context.

180. Article 3 was adopted as amended.

Article 4, paragraph 1

181. An amendment submitted by the Government members of Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Turkey and United States to replace the text of Article 4, paragraph 1, with the proposed text of Paragraph 3 of the Recommendation was withdrawn. Identical proposed amendments by the Worker members and by the Government members of Australia, China, India, Japan, Republic of Korea, Lebanon, Malaysia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand to delete the paragraph entirely were withdrawn. Also withdrawn was an amendment submitted by the Government member of Ethiopia acting on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee to insert the words "which are most representative" after the word "concerned,".

182. An amendment submitted by the Government members of Austria, Belgium, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Switzerland and United Kingdom proposed to insert after the words "workers concerned," the words "as well as other groups of civil society, as appropriate." The Government member of Switzerland, speaking on behalf of the co-sponsors, stated that whilst they would have preferred to have these other groups mentioned in Article 4 in the interests of consensus and bearing in mind that Article 6 of the proposal had in principle been agreed, they withdrew their proposed amendment.

183. An amendment submitted by the Government member of Ethiopia, on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, to delete the words "taking into account relevant international standards" was withdrawn. These Government members had been concerned about the possible legal obligations of the clause but had been reassured by the advice of a Representative of the Legal Adviser, as stated above.

184. The Government member of Egypt wished to state for the record that he fully supported the comments of the Government member of Ethiopia, and would be making a fuller statement regarding this issue later in the proceedings.

185. The Government member of Hungary suggested that the Drafting Committee might wish to change the reference to international standards to international instruments, to conform with other ILO Conventions. The Government member of India cautioned against such a recommendation as this was not an editorial issue but one of substance. The language had been chosen for very specific reasons and it should be retained to reflect those reasons.

186. Paragraph 1 of Article 4 was adopted as amended.

Article 4, proposed new paragraph
after paragraph 1

187. An amendment submitted by the Employer members to insert a new paragraph to read "Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 2, for the types of work referred to under Article 3(d), national law or regulation, or the competent authority, may, after consultation with the workers' and employers' organizations concerned, authorize employment or work as from the age of 16 years, on condition that the health, safety and morals of the children concerned are fully protected, and that the young persons have received adequate specific instruction or vocational training in the relevant branch of activity." was withdrawn.

Article 4, paragraph 2

188. The Worker members withdrew three amendments: to replace the word "after" with the word "in", to replace the words "so determined" with the words "referred to in Article 3(d)", and to add the words "taking into account relevant international standards" at the end of the paragraph.

189. The Government members of Australia, China, India, Japan, Republic of Korea, Lebanon, Malaysia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand also withdrew an amendment to delete the remaining text after the words "types of work" and replace this with the words: "determined in Article 3(d) exist."

190. Paragraph 2 of Article 4 was adopted unchanged.

Article 4, paragraph 3

191. Amendments submitted by the Government members of Canada, Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and United Kingdom to insert the words "or activity" after the words "of work" and to insert the words "by the competent authority," after the word "necessary," were withdrawn in favour of the text in the proposal. An amendment to replace the words "paragraph 1 of this Article" with the words "Article 3(d)", submitted by the Government members of Australia, China, India, Japan, Republic of Korea, Lebanon, Malaysia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand, was also withdrawn.

192. Paragraph 3 of Article 4 was adopted as amended.

193. Article 4 was adopted as amended.

Article 5

194. The Worker members submitted an amendment to include after "each Member" the words "in consultation with employers' and workers' organizations" in order to underscore the need for tripartite consultation. The amendment was supported by the Employer members and the Government members of Cuba and Mexico. The Government member of India, speaking on behalf of the members of the Asia-Pacific Group on the Committee, supported it in principle but proposed to replace the words "in consultation with" by "after consultation with" to make it consistent with language used in other Articles. The subamendment was supported by the Worker members and the Government member of Spain. The Government member of the Netherlands reserved her Government's position because of possible legislative implications of the proposal. She was supported by the Government members of Canada, Colombia, and Sweden. The Government member of Colombia sought clarification from the Legal Adviser on the meaning of the term "appropriate mechanisms", in particular whether these would be national or international in scope. The Deputy Legal Adviser responded by stating that the draft instruments did not define the nature of the mechanisms but required the establishment or designation of a national mechanism.

195. The Government member of the Netherlands suggested a further subamendment to include the words "as appropriate" after the reference to workers' and employers' organizations. The subamendment was strongly opposed by the Worker members who in turn proposed to replace the words "as appropriate" by "concerned".

196. The Committee called on the Legal Adviser to elaborate on the possible legal implications both of the amendment proposed by the Worker members and the subamendment suggested by the Government member of the Netherlands. The Deputy Legal Adviser explained that consultations with the social partners, as proposed by the Worker members, would be an element in the decision-making process. The State, however, would not be bound by the views presented in the consultation process. If the words "as appropriate" were added, as suggested in the subamendment presented by the Government member of the Netherlands, it would make the consultation optional and thus leave it to the State to decide whether or not such consultations be undertaken.

197. In the light of the Legal Adviser's clarifications the Government member of the Netherlands withdrew her subamendment. She stated that though she had initially considered suggesting a further subamendment to include, after the reference to workers' and employers' organizations, the words "and other concerned groups", she had decided not to do so, in a spirit of compromise.

198. The Government members of Colombia and Sweden then also lent their support to the amendment as proposed by the Worker members. The Government member of Colombia added that this was done on the understanding that when criminal law was being redrafted, there would be no obligation on governments to consult with the social partners. The Employer members reiterated their support. The amendment as subamended was adopted.

199. Article 5 was adopted as amended and read: "Each Member, after consultations with employers' and workers' organizations, shall establish or designate appropriate mechanisms to monitor the implementation of the provisions giving effect to this Convention.".

200. Article 5 was adopted as amended.

Article 6, paragraph 1

201. No amendments were submitted for Article 6, paragraph 1, and the paragraph was adopted unchanged.

Article 6, paragraph 2

202. An amendment submitted by the Worker members to insert, after the word "organizations", the words: "taking into account the views of children directly affected by the worst forms of child labour and their families, and, where appropriate, those of other concerned groups committed to the aims of the Convention" was withdrawn. However, the Worker Vice-Chairperson stated that he would be making some comments on the nature of tripartism and on the role of other concerned groups such as the Global March later in the proceedings.

203. The Government member of the Netherlands, speaking on behalf of the Government members of Australia, Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, San Marino, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States, withdrew an amendment to insert after the word "organizations", the words "and other concerned groups, as appropriate" They stressed that under no circumstances did that group of Government members question the tripartite nature of the International Labour Organization.

204. Paragraph 2 of Article 6 was adopted as amended and read: "Such programmes of action shall be designed and implemented in consultation with relevant government institutions and employers' and workers' organizations, taking into consideration the views of other concerned groups as appropriate.".

205. Article 6 was adopted as amended.

Article 7, paragraph 1

206. Two amendments submitted by the Government members of Denmark and Japan to remove the requirement for penal sanctions were considered at the same time. The Government member of Denmark stated that the amendment would allow countries which did not provide penal sanctions to conform to the Convention. Denmark would need to change its criminal laws to provide sanctions, for example, for pornographic films that may have used children whose age was difficult to prove. The Government member of Japan added that the text without the amendment might impede ratification by many countries. The Worker members opposed the amendment. It seemed that the word "including" implied that other measures could be taken prior to the imposition of sanctions. The Employer members also expressed doubt regarding the meaning of the amendment, and therefore also opposed it. The Government member of India stated that when addressing human rights issues, such as this Convention was, the stronger language was preferable and believed the Office text provided better safeguards. The Government member of Denmark withdrew the amendment.

207. The Government member of Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, submitted an amendment concerning the translations in French and Spanish of "provision and application" and withdrew it in favour of it being considered by the Drafting Committee.

208. The Government member of Germany, speaking also on behalf of the Government member of Austria, proposed an amendment aimed at ensuring that the child victims of child labour would not be subject to criminal prosecution. In order not to put into question the overall consensus, the amendment was withdrawn because it might cause problems in the case of activities which might be considered as a criminal offence for a child as well as for an adult.209. Article 7, paragraph 1, was adopted without change.

Article 7, paragraph 2

210. An amendment submitted by the Government members of Austria, Canada, Hungary, Netherlands, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States, to delete the words ", taking into account the importance of education in eliminating child labour," and another amendment submitted by the Government members of Bangladesh, China, India, Indonesia, Lebanon, Malaysia, Pakistan and Philippines to replace the same words by "adopt comprehensive and multidimensional approaches, and" were withdrawn.

211. An amendment submitted by the Government members of Bangladesh, China, India, Indonesia, Lebanon, Malaysia, Pakistan and Philippines, to delete the words "and time-bound" was also withdrawn. The Government member of India, speaking on behalf of the co-sponsors of the amendment stated that the Government members now preferred the original text as the proposed Convention recognized in other provisions that action to eliminate the worst forms of child labour needed to be immediate and effective. He added that any programme of action would have to be multidimensional, with mutually reinforcing cohesive programmes which would necessarily have to be implemented in a time-bound manner. He raised this, since an amendment submitted by the Government members of Austria, Canada, Hungary, Netherlands, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States, to replace the word "time-bound" with the word "immediate" would compromise this fact.

212. The representative of the Netherlands, speaking on behalf of the co-sponsors of that amendment, commented that the amendment had been submitted to keep the language of this Article consistent with Article 1 of the proposed Convention, which spoke of "immediate" action. However they withdrew the amendment as "time-bound" was the language agreed to in the proposal. The Worker members also agreed.

213. The introductory part of paragraph 2 was adopted without change.

Article 7, paragraph 2(a)

214. An amendment submitted by the Government member of Ethiopia, on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, to replace the words "children from engaging" with the words "the engagement of children", was withdrawn, as the sponsors had been assured that the intention conveyed by their formulation was no different from that in the original text. However, after support from the Worker members, and the Government members of the Netherlands and India, and no objections from the Employer members, the amendment was reintroduced and adopted as a clearer formulation of what was meant by placing the emphasis on action against those who would engage children in the worst forms of child labour.

215. Article 7, paragraph 2(a) was adopted as amended to read: "prevent the engagement of children in the worst forms of child labour;".

Article 7, paragraph 2(b)

216. An amendment submitted by the Government of Ethiopia acting on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee to replace the word "work" with the words "the worst forms of child labour, and for their" and two amendments submitted by the Government members of Austria, Canada, Hungary, Netherlands, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States to replace the word "work" with the words "the worst forms of child labour" and to insert the word "simultaneous" after the words "from work," were withdrawn in favour of the text in the proposal.

217. An amendment submitted by the Government members of Austria, Canada, Hungary, Netherlands, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States to replace the word "reintegration" with the word "integration" was adopted, to conform to the wording adopted in Preambular paragraph 4.

218. Several amendments were withdrawn concerning the reference to free basic education as the agreed proposal had dealt with the issue in a new subparagraph (c). The withdrawn amendments included an amendment by the Employer members to delete the words "through, inter alia, access to free basic education"; an amendment submitted by the Government members of Austria, Canada, Hungary, Netherlands, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States to delete the words "free basic"; and an amendment submitted by the Worker members to insert "and vocational training consistent with other relevant international standards". It was clear to the Employers that “Basic education” means primary education, plus one year: in other words, eight or nine years of schooling, such education being curriculum-based and not age-based.

219. Article 7, paragraph 2(b), was adopted as amended to read: "provide the necessary and appropriate direct assistance for their removal from the worst forms of child labour, rehabilitation and social integration;".

Article 7, proposed new paragraph
after paragraph (b)

220. The Committee adopted a new subparagraph (c) as part of the agreed proposal for Article 7 to: "ensure access to free basic education and, wherever possible and appropriate, vocational training, for all children removed from the worst forms of child labour".

Article 7, paragraph 2(c)

221. The Worker members withdrew an amendment to insert the words "including those in hidden work situations" after the words "special risk". The Employer members also withdrew an amendment to delete the words "and reach out to", as did the Government member of Ethiopia on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, to replace the words "reach out to" with the words "have a direct contact with".

222. The Government member of the Netherlands was disappointed that the Worker members had withdrawn the amendment to include a reference to children in "hidden work situations" as she was about to support it. There was a particular concern for children in these situations, such as child domestic workers. The Government member of Norway agreed. The Government members of Austria, Germany and Sweden also expressed their support.

223. The Employer members and the Government member of India were glad that the amendment had been withdrawn; the Government member of India added that, whilst they appreciated that there was a great deal of concern regarding domestic work, there was insufficient clarity or information regarding what was meant by "hidden work" to be able to address it. Moreover, this type of work was to be addressed in Paragraph 3(e) of the Recommendation, so it was unnecessary to mention it here given that it was unclear where hidden work situations started and ended.

224. The Government member of the Netherlands refuted the claim that little was known about the nature of hidden work, and cited some examples of publications on domestic work.

225. The Government member of Hungary reintroduced the Worker members' amendment to add the words "including those in hidden work situations" after the words "special risk" with support from the Government member of the Netherlands. The Employer members argued that the situation with the amendment was problematic because "hidden work" was not clearly defined and they believed that it was covered by Article 7, paragraphs 2(c) and (d). Furthermore, it could lead to a longer list to include other difficult situations. The Government member of Guatemala, supported by the Government member of Cuba, stressed the importance of addressing hidden work situations but felt that the issue was adequately addressed in Paragraph 3 of the proposed Recommendation. The Government member of Lebanon opposed the amendment because she believed it was difficult to identify hidden work situations and a long list might be needed to identify groups of children "at special risk". She also questioned who the authority would be to reach out to these hidden work situations. The Government member of Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, stated that despite his strong feeling about the problem of hidden work, which referred mainly to domestic work, this amendment added ambiguity to the text and therefore the members of the African Group on the Committee opposed it.

226. The Government member of Pakistan, while recognizing the concern expressed by some in the Committee, felt however that "hidden work" could not be included in a legal document without a clear definition. The Government member of Egypt also opposed the amendment as there was no clear definition of hidden work.

227. The Government member of the Netherlands asked for confirmation that the Committee agreed that hidden work situations were covered by Article 7, paragraphs 2(c) and (d). The Government member of India did not agree with this statement. The Government member of Hungary stated that hidden work situations, including domestic work, were covered by Article 7, paragraphs 2(c) and (d) and he therefore withdrew the amendment. The Government member of Egypt disagreed with his statement.

228. The Government member of the Netherlands, speaking on behalf of the Government members of Austria, Canada, Hungary, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States withdrew an amendment to add the words "and children from vulnerable groups" after the words "special risk", because it was adequately covered by Article 7, paragraph 2(c). The Government member of Cuba stated that "children at special risk" included street children, minority children, children with disabilities and children deprived of their liberty. In addition, the Government member of Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, withdrew an amendment to add the words "and their families" after the words "special risk".

229. Article 7, paragraph 2(c), was adopted without change.

Article 7, paragraph 2(d)

230. Article 7, paragraph 2(d), was adopted without change.

Article 7, paragraph 3

231. The Worker members withdrew an amendment to insert the words "and publicize the time-bound measures" after the word "Convention". They wished to draw attention to the need to make all parties, including the ILO, workers and employers, aware of the time-bound measures that governments were taking, and to the fact that they considered this a prerequisite for full implementation of the proposed Convention.

232. Article 7, paragraph 3, was adopted without change.

233. Article 7 was adopted as amended.

Article 8

234. In introducing the discussion on Article 8, the Chairperson referred to formal and informal discussions which had taken place during the adoption of the Preamble. An attempt had been made to bring an agreed text to the Committee. The Worker members submitted the following composite text based on several amendments that had been submitted to Article 8: "Members shall take appropriate steps to give effect to the provisions of this Convention through enhanced international cooperation and assistance including support for social and economic development, poverty eradication programmes and universal education".

235. The Government member of India cited informal discussions on the possible redrafting of Article 8 and referred to a specific amendment submitted by a number of countries belonging to the Asia-Pacific Group on the Committee on a Preambular paragraph which would have referred to the subject of international cooperation. That amendment had been withdrawn on the basis of a statement by the Worker members that this question would be reflected in Article 8. He confirmed the strong support of most of the members of the Asia-Pacific Group for the text proposed by the Worker members.

236. The Government member of Ethiopia supported the proposed formulation, as did the Employer members. The Government member of Norway, speaking on behalf of the Government member of Sweden, while indicating general support for the text, expressed some reservations about the word "enhanced". She referred to the substantial contributions made by the two countries to support developing countries and her apprehension about accepting a legal obligation to increase financial contributions. The Government member of the United Kingdom supported the second part of the proposed text but was concerned that the language of the first part did not give sufficient emphasis to steps at the national level to give effect to the provisions of the Convention. She submitted a subamendment to insert the word "including" after the word "Convention". Referring to the concerns expressed by the previous speaker concerning the word "enhanced", she argued that the word did not necessarily imply the provision of more financial resources but could refer, for example, to better targeted interventions and programmes.

237. The Government member of the Netherlands supported the subamendment proposed by the Government member of the United Kingdom and also suggested the deletion of the word "enhanced". The Government member of Hungary opposed the inclusion of the word "including", arguing that the Article was concerned essentially with international cooperation and assistance. He also submitted a subamendment to delete the word "enhanced". The Government member of Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, emphasized the need for cooperation on legal and judicial matters and wanted the word "enhanced" to be retained. He also stated that, as the purpose of the Article was international cooperation and assistance, the addition of the word "including" would render Article 8 unnecessary as there were preceding Articles on national obligations. The Worker members referred to previous discussions on the same subject and confirmed their request for an Article with strong language underscoring the need for global and international action against the worst forms of child labour. The Worker members reaffirmed that poverty anywhere constituted a danger to prosperity everywhere. He recalled the language adopted in Article 7, paragraph 1, and stressed the need to combine national and international action. The Government members of Cuba and India welcomed the statement of the Worker members and expressed concern regarding some governments' need to reconsider the text discussed in conjunction with the adoption of the relevant Preambular paragraphs. Referring to the subamendment submitted by the Government member of the United Kingdom, the Government member of India opposed the proposal and recalled the references to national obligations included in Article 7, paragraph 1. He also supported the proposal to retain the word "enhanced" on the basis of the explanations previously offered by the Government member of the United Kingdom to the effect that this did not refer only to financial assistance. The Government member of the Netherlands, on behalf of the members of the IMEC Group on the Committee, and the Government members of Germany and Sweden indicated their wish for further group consultation on the proposed text. She reiterated the full commitment of the IMEC Group of the Committee to the principle of member States assisting one another in giving effect to the provisions of the Convention through international cooperation or assistance.

238. The Government member of India recalled the broad support for the proposal submitted by the Worker members and the members of the Asia-Pacific Group on the Committee. It was a balanced proposal, providing for flexibility and leaving it to individual member States to decide on the nature of such cooperation and assistance. He noted that international cooperation in this context should not be viewed in terms of a donor-recipient equation, but rather as a partnership on an equal footing from which all parties would stand to benefit.

239. The Government member of Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, supported the position expressed by the Government member of India and the text proposed by the Worker members.

240. The Government member of Australia proposed a new subamendment: "Members shall take appropriate steps to assist one another in giving effect to the provisions of this Convention through enhanced international cooperation or assistance including support for social and economic development, poverty eradication programmes and universal education."

241. A discussion ensued, based on this new subamendment and the earlier proposals. The Government member of Germany supported the subamendment though he would have preferred the original Office text. He considered that strictly speaking, the more appropriate place for Article 8 was in a Recommendation, not in a Convention. He also recalled that the Government of Germany had always been willing to assist countries where child labour was a problem. Further support for the new subamendment was also expressed from the Government members of Italy, New Zealand, United Kingdom and the members of the Latin American Group on the Committee.

242. The Government member of Hungary requested the Legal Adviser's view on how far the provisions in the subamendment would create a binding obligation for ratifying member States to assist one another. The Deputy Legal Adviser stressed the idea of partnership contained in the spirit of the Article. He explained that no obligation would arise from either proposal for ratifying member States in relation to a particular level or form of cooperation or assistance. There was only an obligation to take appropriate steps towards enhanced international partnership, and it was up to individual States to decide on those appropriate steps.

243. The Government member of the United States considered the subamendment proposed by the Government member of Australia a good basis for further discussion. He understood that "partnerships" as referred to by the representative of the Legal Adviser meant "working together," and that Article 8 encouraged members to work together to meet the goals of the Convention. He further understood that in no way did Article 8 require any member to provide any specific form or amount of cooperation or assistance. No legal obligation was created as to the nature of such cooperation or assistance and therefore the matter was left entirely to the discretion of individual member States.

244. The Government member of India maintained that he strongly opposed the wording "international cooperation or assistance", as contained in the subamendment. Cooperation encompassed assistance and he therefore suggested a further subamendment which replaced the word "or" linking cooperation with assistance by the word "and". He was supported by the Government member of Finland. The Government member of Australia responded that there was a need for greater flexibility and that the word "or" reflected this need.

245. The Worker members noted that cooperation and assistance should not be seen purely in economic and financial terms. While these represented an important dimension, there were also other forms of assistance such as international legal assistance which had to be taken into account when considering the Article. In order to arrive at a compromise solution, he suggested a further subamendment which included both "and" and "or" and read as "international cooperation and/or assistance". The Government member of Hungary noted that "and/or" would effectively mean "or".

246. The Government member of Hungary had wished to hear whether the Committee had agreed with the Legal Adviser's opinion on the legal consequences of the text proposed by the Government member of Australia, but there had been no disagreement.

247. The Government member of Australia, speaking on behalf of the members of the IMEC Group on the Committee and other members, stated their support for the subamendment submitted by the Worker members. The Employer members also supported the subamendment.

248. The Government member of Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of members of the African Group on the Committee, expressed their disappointment with the position adopted by some members on this issue. He reluctantly agreed to the amendment submitted by the Government member of Australia and subamended by the Worker members to include "and/or". He outlined his Group's understanding that, under Article 8, the obligations of ratifying member States were cumulative requirements necessary for the implementation of the provisions of the Convention; the Article was an essential component of the Convention and he asked all ratifying member States to respect it in good faith.

249. The Government member of India fully endorsed the statement made on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, and confirmed the particular importance attached to this Article by the vast majority of the members of the Asia-Pacific Group on the Committee. Referring to the nature of obligations entailed by the Convention, he stressed that obligations are the same for each Article. While expressing some reservations on the proposed formulation, in a spirit of compromise he supported the text of the Article as subamended by the Worker members. He wished to state his disagreement with the Government member of Hungary's statement that no delegation had objected or responded to his enquiry and reaffirmed his understanding that there was an obligation under the Convention for members to assist each other. The Government member of Chile, speaking on behalf of the Government members of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Uruguay and Venezuela, supported the consensus that had emerged in support of the subamendment submitted by the Worker members, as did the Government member of Colombia. The Chairperson noted that there was unanimity on the text proposed for Article 8 and that, therefore, the Committee had agreed to withdraw all other amendments submitted on Article 8.

250. Article 8 was adopted as amended to read: "Members shall take appropriate steps to assist one another in giving effect to the provisions of this Convention through enhanced international cooperation and/or assistance including support for social and economic development, poverty eradication programmes and universal education."

Proposed new Article
after Article 8

251. The Worker members submitted an amendment to add a new Article after Article 8 to read as follows: "Members shall take appropriate steps to promote enhanced cooperation and assistance between the ILO and other international institutions in order to promote the realization of the aims of this Convention.". The Worker members referred to the important role played by international financial institutions and expressed the dissatisfaction of workers' organizations as regards the assistance received by developing countries. He referred to the position of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who had affirmed that it was impossible to build economic development without the development of the people of the beneficiary countries. The ILO with its unique tripartite structure and being the institution concerned with such subjects as the elimination of child labour had a special role in promoting social objectives. He strongly encouraged the ILO to intensify its efforts and take a leading role in reducing poverty and ensuring that all work was decent work.

252. The Government member of India said he understood and supported the feelings which had led to the Worker members' position. He recognized that there had been occasions when certain programmes of international agencies had failed to achieve positive results. He also underlined the difficulties encountered by the ILO in promoting international labour standards where jobs were difficult to create or maintain. He appreciated the direction of the strategic objectives presented by the Director-General of the ILO, particularly the emphasis on employment generation to eradicate poverty and ensure social progress. Referring to the obligations deriving from the ratification of this Convention, he believed that they would be the responsibility of ratifying member States and therefore did not see how the amendment if adopted could lead to its realization. With this in mind, he asked the Worker members to withdraw the amendment. The Employer members agreed with the statement made by the Government member of India. The Worker members expressed their appreciation of the various views expressed and withdrew their amendment, while reaffirming the need for complementary international action towards the immediate elimination of the worst forms of child labour.

253. The Chairperson expressed his great satisfaction for the work completed and submitted the Convention to the Committee for adoption.

254. The Convention was adopted as amended.

255. After the proposed Convention was adopted, the Government member of Egypt stated that Egypt had accepted the text of the proposed Convention but would like to put on record a number of points. Concerning Preambular paragraph 3, the phrase "international action" could only be interpreted in light of Article 8. This had clearly been stated during the deliberations of the Committee on this paragraph, moreover the Committee's intent was clear in considering this phrase to refer exclusively to action undertaken with the consent of all concerned governments. Nevertheless, his Government had reservations on this wording because it could be misinterpreted or abused. Referring to Article 3(a), he supported the statement made by the Government member of Ethiopia on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee. With regard to Article 3(d), he favoured using the same language as Article 3, paragraph 1, of Convention No. 138, and was concerned that using different wording in describing the same activities could create confusion in the application of both Conventions. He added that his Government did not interpret the substitution of "jeopardize" with "harm" as adding any new obligations or widening the scope of the proposed Convention as compared to Convention No. 138. This remark also applied equally to Article 4, paragraph 1, where the phrase "taking into consideration relevant international standards" was added. As for the reference to Paragraph 3 in the Recommendation in Article 4, paragraph 1, of the proposed Convention, he stressed that his Government considered the interpretation given by the Legal Adviser to be the only correct interpretation. Referring to the proposed new Paragraph 4 in the Recommendation which was paraphrased from Article 3, paragraph 3, of Convention No. 138, he considered that this Paragraph should have been included in the proposed Convention. Nevertheless, he stated that since reference had been made to this Paragraph in the proposed Convention it was his Government's interpretation that it carried the same legal weight as if it had been included in the proposed Convention, and that hence, the proposed Convention did not add any new requirements regarding the determination of the minimum age for hazardous work. Concerning Article 8, he supported the statements made by the Government members of Ethiopia and India during the Committee's discussion on the Article.

B. Proposed Recommendation concerning the
prohibition and immediate elimination of
the worst forms of child labour

Title

256. Two amendments were proposed by the Government member of Ethiopia, on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, and by the Government member of India, on behalf of the Government members of Australia, China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Lebanon, Malaysia, New Zealand and Pakistan, to add "action for" after the word "immediate" in order to align the title of the Recommendation with that of the Convention. The Employer members and Worker members supported the amendment, which was adopted. The Worker members proposed a subamendment to add the word "the" after "action for". The subamendment was adopted.

257. The title was adopted as amended.

Preambular Paragraph 1

258. Preambular Paragraph 1 was adopted without change.

Preambular Paragraph 2

Preambular Paragraph 2 was adopted without change.

Preambular Paragraph 3

260. Preambular Paragraph 3 was adopted as amended to conform to the title adopted for the Convention: "the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999, and".

Preambular Paragraph 4

Preambular Paragraph 4 was adopted without change.

Preambular Paragraph 5

262. Preambular Paragraph 5 was adopted as amended, to conform to the reference to the title of the Convention: "these proposals shall take the form of a Recommendation supplementing the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999;".

Preambular Paragraph 6

The Employer members and the Government member of Ethiopia, on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, submitted identical amendments to delete "the Immediate Abolition of" to align the text with that of the Convention. The amendments were adopted.

264. Preambular Paragraph 6 was adopted as amended.

265. The Preamble was adopted as amended.

Paragraph 1

266. The Employer members proposed an amendment to delete the words ", and should be applied in conjunction with them" which they considered to be superfluous as the word "supplement" covered this phrase. The Government member of Lebanon questioned the meaning of the expression "should be applied in conjunction with them." She recalled that the provisions of the Recommendation were only guidelines which were not binding but complemented those of the Convention. The Worker members disagreed and opposed the amendment. The Employer members withdrew the amendment.

267. The Committee modified the title to conform to the short title adopted for the Convention. Paragraph 1 was adopted as amended to read: "The provisions of this Recommendation supplement those of the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999; (hereafter referred to as 'the Convention'), and should be applied in conjunction with them."

Paragraph 2

268. The Worker members submitted an amendment to add the words ", as a matter of urgency," after the word "implemented", in order to align the text of the Recommendation with that of Article 1 of the Convention which included the same phrase. The Employer members, the Government members of the Netherlands and Austria, and the Government member of Mexico, speaking on behalf of the Government members of Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Mexico and Uruguay, supported the amendment. The Government of India recalled the lengthy debate on this wording in the Convention and stated that the members of the Asia-Pacific Group on the Committee fully supported the amendment. He called on the Worker members to display understanding when the deletion of the word "immediate" would be proposed later in other provisions of the Recommendation. The amendment was adopted.

269. The Worker members proposed an amendment to replace the existing text after the words "organizations" with ", taking into consideration the views of the children directly affected by the worst forms of child labour and their families, and, as appropriate, other concerned groups committed to the aims of this Convention.". Regarding the phrase "as appropriate, other concerned groups committed to the aims of this Convention", they wanted to make it clear that the reference was to groups that were committed to abolishing the worst forms of child labour. The Government member of Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, supported the amendment. The Government member of the Netherlands endorsed the amendment and stated that they had wanted such a reference in the Convention and supported this reference in the Recommendation. The Government member of Sweden supported the amendment and proposed a subamendment to change "this Convention" to "the Convention and Recommendation"; this was supported by the Worker members. The Government member of Switzerland supported the amendment as her Government supported the participation of other groups.

270. The Government member of India, on behalf of the members of the Asia-Pacific Group on the Committee, stated that they fully supported the spirit of the amendment, but that considering that there were approximately two and a half million children in the worst forms of child labour in India, taking account of their views and their parents' views would pose a logistical problem. Thus, the Government member of India proposed to subamend the amendment by deleting "the children directly affected by the worst forms of child labour and their families, and, as appropriate,". The Government member of the United Kingdom supported the Worker members' amendment and expressed surprise that India did not support it, because India was at the forefront in involving children and their families in the implementation of programmes dealing with the worst forms of child labour. The Government member of India acknowledged that his Government did involve children and their families as much as possible but stated that the large number involved created a logistical problem.

271. The Employer members were also concerned with the mechanisms that would be used to consider the views of children and their families and the broad nature of this recommendation.

272. The Government member of Mexico supported the Worker members' amendment and recalled Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child which provides that children have the right to participate in decisions that affect them. The Government members of Argentina, Canada and France also supported the Worker members' amendment.

273. The Employer members proposed the wording "in so far as possible" instead of "as appropriate". The Government member of the United Kingdom supported the Indian amendment and proposed deleting the second reference to "as appropriate". This was opposed by the Government member of Finland who supported the Worker members' amendment. The Government member of India supported the proposal made by the United Kingdom. The Government member of the Dominican Republic supported the Worker members' amendment. The Government member of Zimbabwe also supported the Worker members' amendment and pointed out that although the Recommendation included guidelines that Governments should strive to achieve, they were not legally bound by them.

274. The Government member of India restated that they were not opposing the amendment or the idea behind it. They had proposed amending the text to take account of the practical problem that may result and to ensure that the Recommendation did not include something that was not feasible.

275. A show of hands by Government members indicated that there was broad support for the amendment. The Government member of India withdrew his subamendment. However, the Employer members reiterated that they were concerned about the practicalities of how such a recommendation would be carried out. The Government member of Finland, while maintaining his support for the Worker members' amendment, stated that, if this would pave the way for a compromise, one could add words "as far as possible" to qualify the provisions. The Government member of Spain agreed with the Employer members' concerns, and stated that designing programmes of action was one thing and implementing them was another. If a country were to design a programme of action against the worst forms of child labour, it would be impractical to solicit the views of all children concerned. The Government member of Colombia also supported these views and commented that it would be almost impossible, for example, to take into consideration the views of children who were the victims of trafficking. He therefore had supported the subamendment proposed by the Government member of India.

276. The Government member of Switzerland remarked that a Recommendation spoke to the ideal practice and governments were not obliged to undertake the measures laid out in Recommendations, merely take them into consideration. Most member States had expressed support for this ideal, and she therefore appealed to the Employer members to support the amendment.

277. The Worker members, quoting from Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, pointed out that most member States had already entered into a commitment to allow children the opportunity to express their views, and that this need not be directly with each individual child but through other appropriate mechanisms. There had been considerable support for their amendment and they were not willing to withdraw it.

278. The Employer members stated that they had never been against the proposal, merely that they had wished for further discussion regarding the practicalities of consultation and could now support it. The amendment as subamended was adopted.

279. An amendment submitted by the Government member of Ethiopia, acting on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, to delete the words "as appropriate" was withdrawn, and the introductory part to Paragraph 2 as amended was adopted.

Paragraph 2(a)

280. An amendment was submitted by the Government member of Ethiopia, acting on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, to insert after the word "identifying", the word "prohibiting" to reflect that identification was not sufficient, as one of the main aims of the Convention was to prohibit the worst forms of child labour.

281. The Worker members stated that whilst they agreed with the spirit of the proposed amendment, prohibition was a legislative issue, and it was addressed elsewhere, in the instruments. The Government member of Ethiopia withdrew the amendment.

282. Paragraph 2(a) was adopted without change.

Paragraph 2(b)

283. The Government member of India noted that an amendment had been adopted to Article 7, paragraph 2(a), to change the phrase "from engaging in" to "the engagement of", and for the sake of consistency this should also be amended in clause (b) of Paragraph 2. Similarly, the word "emotional" had been replaced with "psychological". The Government member of the United Kingdom made the same point regarding the word "reintegration" which had been changed elsewhere to "integration". The Committee agreed to delete "emotional" and substitute "psychological". The Chairman stated that the other points would be included and brought to the attention of the Drafting Committee.

284. Paragraph 2(b) was adopted as amended.

Paragraph 2(c) and 2(c)(i)

285. Paragraph 2(c) and 2 (c)(i) were adopted without change.

Paragraph 2(c)(ii)

286. The Government member of India, speaking on behalf of the Government members of China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Lebanon, Malaysia and Pakistan withdrew an amendment to replace the words "the problem of hidden work situations" with the word "work". Despite their preference for the deletion of this language, they had agreed to do so to reach consensus.

Proposed new sub-clause
after Paragraph 2(c)(ii)

287. The Government member of Ethiopia, acting on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, submitted an amendment to insert a new subclause after paragraph 2(c)(ii), to read "(iii) the girl child;". They stated that it was clear that girls were particularly vulnerable to and subject to the worst forms of child labour, and attention should be drawn to this by including an explicit subclause on the girl child.

288. The proposal received overwhelming support from the Government members of Bolivia, Canada, Cuba, Finland, Guatemala, Mexico, the Netherlands, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and from India, speaking on behalf of the members of the Asia-Pacific Group on the Committee. The Employer members also supported the amendment, as did the Worker members. However, they suggested that the subclause would more appropriately come before 2(c)(ii) and become new subclause (ii). The Government member of Ethiopia stated that this proposal was an improvement on their original amendment and the amendment was adopted as subamended.

Paragraph 2(c)(iii) and (iv)

289. Subclauses (iii) and (iv) were adopted without change.

290. Paragraph 2(c) was adopted as amended.

Paragraph 2(d)

291. An amendment was submitted by the Government member of Ethiopia, acting on behalf of the Government members of the African Group on the Committee, to replace the words "reaching out to" with the words "working with". The Government member of Ethiopia explained that the phrase "reaching out" did not suggest clearly enough the need for the involvement of children and their communities in programmes of action.

292. The Government member of the United Kingdom supported the amendment but the Worker members stated that the amendment changed the intention, as "reaching out" was more proactive and was intended to suggest that programmes of action should aim at actively seeking out and working with children and their communities. The Government member of the Netherlands agreed with the Worker members' interpretation and suggested that both phrases could be used, so that the clause would read: "(d) identifying, reaching out to and working with communities where children are at special risk;".

293. The Government member of Ethiopia had no objections to this subamendment, and neither did the Employer members. The Government member of Bolivia also supported the proposal and asked that the Drafting Committee change the word "descubrir" in the Spanish text since it had a clandestine connotation. The amendment as subamended was adopted.

294. Paragraph 2(d) was adopted as amended.

Paragraph 2(e)

295. Paragraph 2(e) was adopted without change.

296. Paragraph 2 was adopted as amended.

Paragraph 3

297. Paragraph 3 was part of the proposal that had been received by the Committee from the informal tripartite working group, as was new Paragraph 4 below.

298. The Employer members submitted an amendment to replace the words "as a minimum" with the words "inter alia". The members of the Committee unanimously supported the amendment which was adopted as was the first part of the Paragraph as amended.

Paragraph 3(a)

299. The Employer members proposed to replace the word "emotional" with the word "psychological". The amendment was adopted and Paragraph 3(a) was adopted as amended.

Paragraph 3(b)

300. Paragraph 3(b) was adopted without change.

Paragraph 3(c)

301. Paragraph 3(c) was adopted without change.

Paragraph 3(d)

302. Paragraph 3(d) was adopted without change.

Paragraph 3(e)

303. The Employer members proposed replacing the words "which does not allow for the possibility of returning home each day" with the words "where the child is unreasonably confined to the premises of the employer". This was adopted and Paragraph 3(e) was adopted as amended to read: "work under particularly difficult conditions such as work for long hours or during the night or work where the child is unreasonably confined to the premises of the employer."

304. Paragraph 3 was adopted as amended.

Proposed new Paragraph
after Paragraph 3

305. The Employer members submitted an amendment (included in the agreed proposal) to add a new Paragraph after Paragraph 3 to read:

For the types of work referred to under Article 3(d) of the Convention and Paragraph 3 of the Recommendation, national laws or regulations or the competent authority could, after consultation with the workers' and employers' organizations concerned, authorize employment or work as from the age of 16 years on condition that the health, safety and morals of the children concerned are fully protected, and that the young persons have received adequate specific instruction or vocational training in the relevant branch of activity.

The Government member of India stated that although this wording had been discussed and agreed upon by the members of the Committee, he wished to point out that the introductory words "For the types of work" differed slightly from those used in Paragraph 3 which started "In determining the types of work", and suggested aligning the texts. The Employer Vice-Chairperson stated that he believed the wording was different because the meaning was different. Following a discussion on the drafting, the amendment was adopted.

306. New Paragraph 4 was adopted.

Paragraph 4(1)

307. The Government member of Ethiopia, acting on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, submitted an amendment to delete the word "immediate" before the word "elimination". He referred to previous discussions on the concept of immediate elimination. The Government member of Norway proposed a subamendment to move the word "immediate" before the word "prohibition".The proposal was supported by the Government member of the Netherlands. The Government member of India, speaking on behalf of the members of the Asia-Pacific Group on the Committee, said that his group had submitted an identical amendment. The Worker members expressed initial support for the amendment proposed by the members of the African Group on the Committee provided that this deletion did not harm the intent of the instruments. They then referred to an amendment they had submitted to add the words "as a matter of urgency." at the end of the sentence, and asked for the two amendments to be considered together. The Government member of the Netherlands supported the amendment with some regret, as did the Government member of Norway who withdrew their subamendment. The Employer members also supported the formulation containing the two amendments, which were adopted.

308. The Government members of Canada, Denmark, Norway and Switzerland submitted an amendment to replace the existing Paragraph with the following text: "As far as possible, detailed information and statistical data on the nature and extent of the worst forms of child labour should be compiled and kept up to date to serve as a basis for determining priorities for national action for its prohibition and immediate elimination.". The Government member of Canada referred to the possible difficulties of some countries in collecting statistical information and stressed the importance of the collection of data itself, not how they were disaggregated. Priority should be given to the collection of statistics on the worst forms of child labour. The Worker members were puzzled by the use of the words "As far as possible", and argued that the proposed language suggested the relevant institutions could minimize their efforts. He asked the Government members concerned to recognize the urgency of this aspect and withdraw the amendment. The Government member of Spain supported the amendment, but added that it implied that there was no distinction between all forms of child labour and its worst forms. The Worker members expressed some doubts about the capacities of certain countries to separate information about forms of child labour that required immediate elimination and other forms.

309. The Government member of the Netherlands opposed the amendment and argued that it was also essential to start compiling information on all forms of child labour as a preventive measure. The Government member of Mexico also opposed the amendment and recalled that the United Nations Commission for Human Rights and other human rights mechanisms systematically referred to the fact that national and international programmes of action to combat, inter alia, prostitution, sale and trafficking of children and the use of children in pornography had not been carried out effectively because of the lack of statistical information. The members of the African Group on the Committee, as well as the Government members of India and the United Kingdom, expressed their preference for the existing text as previously amended by the Worker members. In a spirit of cooperation and consensus and having noted the position expressed by various members, the Government member of Canada withdrew the amendment.

310. The Government member of Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, withdrew an amendment to insert the words "and international cooperation" after the word "action".

311. Paragraph 4(1) was adopted as amended to read: "Detailed information and statistical data on the nature and extent of child labour should be compiled and kept up to date to serve as a basis for determining priorities for national action for the abolition of child labour, in particular for the prohibition and elimination of its worst forms as a matter of urgency.".

Paragraph 4(2)

312. The Worker members submitted an amendment to add the words ", school attendance, and geographical location, and should take into account the importance of an effective system of birth registration, which should include issuing of a birth certificate.". The Worker members explained that this formulation would help to identify the areas where information should be collected and used effectively. The Employer members supported the amendment. The Government members of Canada, Italy, Netherlands, Switzerland and the United Kingdom supported the amendment as did the Government member of Chile on behalf of the members of the Latin American Group on the Committee. The Government member of India, speaking on behalf of the majority of the members of the Asia-Pacific Group on the Committee, stated their surprise at the level of detail included in the amendment and considered that national authorities should be left to decide how best to handle these matters. The Government member of Bolivia supported the position expressed by the Government member of India. While supporting the proposal submitted by the Worker members, the Government member of Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, reported that various members of this Group had signalled they would encounter practical difficulties in implementing the provisions of this amendment, especially the issuing of birth certificates. The Government member of Australia proposed a subamendment to improve the readability of the provision: "As far as possible, such information and statistical data should include data disaggregated by sex, age group, occupation, branch of economic activity, status in employment, school attendance and geographical location. The importance of an effective system of birth registration, which should include issuing of a birth certificate, should be taken into account.". The Employer and Worker members supported the subamendment and the amendment was adopted as subamended. The Worker members withdrew an amendment to insert the words "as a minimum" after the word "include".

313. Paragraph 4(2) was adopted as amended.

Paragraph 4(3)

314. The Government member of Ethiopia, acting on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, submitted an amendment to delete the word "immediate" before the word "elimination". He referred to the arguments presented during the adoption of Paragraph 4(1).

315. The Worker members noted that the Paragraph addressed the question of violations, and the removal of the word "immediate" would expose governments to a wider interpretation of their obligations. The Government member of Ethiopia confirmed that the objective was to take immediate action. The Employer members supported the amendment as did the Government member of India. The Worker members also supported the amendment. The amendment was adopted.

316. Paragraph 4(3) was adopted as amended.

317. Paragraph 4 was adopted as amended.

Paragraph 5

318. Paragraph 5 was adopted without change.

Paragraph 6

319. Paragraph 6 was adopted without change.

Paragraph 7

320. The members of the Asia-Pacific Group and the African Group on the Committee submitted an amendment to delete the word "immediate" before the word "elimination" in order to make it consistent with earlier Articles and Paragraphs in the instruments. It was supported by the Employer and Worker members and a majority of Government members and was adopted.

321. The Government members of Bolivia, Colombia and Venezuela submitted an amendment to delete the words "and, as appropriate, other concerned groups", in order to ensure consistency with the proposed text of the Convention and to reflect the tripartite structure of the ILO, since it was related to the monitoring of the Convention. The amendment was supported by the Employer and Worker members and the Government members of Cuba, India, and Mexico. It was opposed by the Government member of the Netherlands, on behalf of the members of the IMEC Group on the Committee. A subamendment proposed by the Government member of the Netherlands to delete the entire Paragraph, in view of its similarity to Article 5 of the Convention, was supported by the Government members of Denmark, Finland, Guatemala and Switzerland, but opposed by both the Worker and Employer members and the Government members of Bolivia and Mexico on the grounds that it had to be in the Recommendation because not all member States would ratify the Convention. The subamendment was withdrawn and the amendment adopted. A subamendment submitted by the Worker members to insert after "concerned groups" the words "committed to the aims of the Convention" was withdrawn as no longer necessary.

322. Paragraph 7 was adopted as amended and read: "Members should establish or designate appropriate national mechanisms to monitor the implementation of national provisions for the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour after consultation with employers' and workers' organizations."

Paragraph 8

323. Identical amendments were submitted by the Government member of Ethiopia, on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, and by the Government members of China, India and Indonesia, as well as the other members of the Asia-Pacific Group on the Committee, to delete the word "immediate" before the word "elimination". The Government member of Ethiopia explained that this was consistent with the deletion of "immediate" in the title and in previous Articles and Paragraphs, and the Government member of India echoed his sentiments. The amendments were adopted.

324. Paragraph 8 was adopted as amended.

Paragraph 9

325. Identical amendments were submitted by the Government member of Ethiopia, on behalf of the Government members of the African Group on the Committee, and by the Government members of China, India and Indonesia, as well as the other members of the Asia-Pacific Group on the Committee, to delete the word "immediate" before the word "elimination", for the same reasons as in the previous paragraph. The amendments were adopted.

326. An amendment was submitted by the Government member of Colombia, and supported by Bolivia and Cuba, to replace the words "in the event of non-compliance" with the words "for compliance". The Government member of Colombia explained that he did not know how the competent authority could take steps to determine the persons held to be responsible in the event of non-compliance of national provisions, as persons were usually held responsible for compliance. Following an explanation by the Representative of the Secretary-General that the Paragraph had been formulated in the negative to prevent child victims from being subject to penalties, while ensuring those responsible for their victimization were held responsible, the Government member of Colombia withdrew the amendment.

327. Paragraph 9 was adopted as amended.

Paragraph 10

328. Identical amendments were submitted by the Government members of China, India, Indonesia, as well as other members of the Asia-Pacific Group on the Committee, and by the Government member of Ethiopia, on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, to delete the word "immediate" before the word "elimination". The Government member of Ethiopia stated that, as previously, the reason was to ensure consistency in the text.

329. The Worker members urged the Government member of Ethiopia to rethink his position with regard to this Paragraph, as the immediacy of the need for action to eliminate child labour was in danger of being lost as a result of the deletion of all references to "immediate". He wished to emphasize that the context of each provision needed to be considered. Following a discussion regarding the most suitable language, the Committee adopted a proposal put by the Government member of Pakistan to insert the words "as a matter of urgency," after "the worst forms of child labour", as this was consistent with amendments to the text of the Convention. The amendment as subamended was adopted.

Paragraph 10(a), (b) and (c)

330. Clauses (a), (b) and (c) were adopted without change.

331. Paragraph 10 was adopted as amended.

Paragraph 11

332. The introductory part of Paragraph 11 was adopted without change.

Paragraph 11(a)

333. The Government member of Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee proposed aligning the text with Article 3(a) of the Convention by replacing the words "forced or compulsory labour, debt bondage and serfdom" with the following words: "debt bondage and serfdom and forced or compulsory labour, including forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict". The Employer and Worker members and the Government member of India, on behalf of the members of the Asia-Pacific Group on the Committee, supported the amendment. The amendment was adopted.

334. Paragraph 11(a) was adopted as amended.

Paragraph 11(b)

335. Paragraph 11(b) was adopted without change.

Paragraph 11(c)

336. The Worker members proposed adding: ", or in illicit activities which involve the carrying or use of firearms or other weapons" at the end of the sentence. The Worker Vice-Chairperson stated that the Committee members had agreed that drug trafficking and similar forms of illicit behaviour needed to be addressed. The use of guns was another illicit activity that should be deplored. A discussion ensued on whether "illicit", "illegal" or "unlawful" was the appropriate wording and whether the amendment was restricted to the context of the production and trafficking of drugs. The Government member of the United States proposed including the word "unlawful" before the word "carrying". The Worker Vice-Chairperson stated that as the clause was referring to illicit activities, the word "unlawful" was not necessary. No child should be involved in illicit activities or be used to carry guns or be a "gun runner". The Employer Vice-Chairperson stated that it was not clear that the amendment was related to drug trafficking. The Government member of Hungary proposed a subamendment to replace the amendment with ", or for activities which involve the unlawful carrying or use of firearms or other weapons".

337. The Employer and Worker members and the Government members of Cuba, Portugal and United States supported the subamendment. The amendment was adopted as subamended and Paragraph 11(c) was adopted as amended.

338. Paragraph 11 was adopted as amended.

Paragraph 12

339. The Government member of Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, and the Government member of India, speaking on behalf of the Government members of China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Lebanon, Malaysia, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea and Singapore, proposed deleting the word "immediate". The Employer members supported the amendment. The Worker members pointed out that although it could be appropriate to align the text in this instance, the deletion of the word "immediate" was not appropriate on every occasion, as it could change the meaning of the text. The Worker members supported the amendment, and the amendment was adopted.

340. Paragraph 12 was adopted as amended.

Paragraph 13

341. In light of the previous comments made by the Worker members, the Government member of India, speaking on behalf of the members of China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Lebanon, Malaysia, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea and Singapore, proposed modifying their original amendment to delete the word "immediate" and by adding "as a matter of urgency" at the end of the Paragraph. This was supported by the Government member of Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, who had submitted a similar amendment. The Employer members supported the amendment as subamended. The Worker members proposed formulating the sentence in line with the wording agreed upon in the Convention, that was to include "immediate measures for" before "elimination" and "as a matter of urgency" at the end. Following a brief discussion that included several proposals on appropriate wording, the Government member of the United Kingdom proposed inserting "as a matter of urgency" after the word "provide". The Worker members supported the proposal as did the Employer members and the amendment as subamended was adopted.

342. The Worker members submitted an amendment to add the following words at the end of the sentence:", such as special supervision of enterprises which have used the worst forms of child labour, and, in cases of persistent violation, consideration of temporary or permanent revoking of permits to operate". The Worker members stated that this provision was aimed at enterprises that would be glad to pay fines and continue engaging in practices of abusing children, such as their use in pornography or prostitution, which were lucrative for the operators. Therefore, the Worker members wanted to provide the possibility for revoking the permits of persistent violators. The Employer members expressed concern about the difficulty of applying the provision given the complexity of criminal codes. The Government members of Canada and the United Kingdom appreciated the spirit of the amendment and supported it. The Government member of Cuba stated that consideration should be given to the current preparation of the United Nations draft optional protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, which was along the same lines as this amendment. The Government member of the Dominican Republic welcomed the amendment because it included coverage of juridical persons. He stated that action should be taken by ministries of labour to ensure that inspectors were effective. The Government member of India, speaking on behalf of the members of the Asia-Pacific Group on the Committee, supported the amendment but questioned what was envisaged by the phrase "special supervision", in view of the fact that monitoring mechanisms were included in Paragraph 7. The Government members of Portugal, Switzerland and Norway supported the amendment.

343. The Government member of Hungary expressed concern over the word "enterprise" which referred to a legal entity and would not cover self-employed entrepreneurs. He proposed replacing it with "employers or establishments". The Worker members and the Government members of Colombia and Austria supported the subamendment. The Government member of Ethiopia expressed support but was concerned with the word "persistent" because this might result in delay when dealing with the worst forms of child labour. The Employer Vice-Chairperson opposed the subamendment as it could cast a derogatory meaning on the term "employer". He proposed "individuals or establishments". The Government member of Hungary pointed out that labour inspectors did not inspect individuals: they inspected people who employed others. Following a discussion about the appropriate terms and the meaning of various proposals such as "legal and natural persons", "enterprises" and "establishments", the Government member of Hungary withdrew the subamendment, and the amendment was adopted.

344. Paragraph 13 was adopted as amended.

Paragraph 14

345. Identical amendments were submitted by the Government member of Ethiopia, acting on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, and by the Government members of China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Lebanon, Malaysia, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea and Singapore, to delete the word "immediate", to ensure consistency with the remainder of the text.

346. The amendment was supported by the Employer and Worker members. The amendment was adopted, and the introductory part of the Paragraph was adopted as amended.

Paragraph 14(a)

347. An amendment was submitted by the Government members of Ireland, Netherlands, New Zealand and United Kingdom, to insert "and mobilizing" after "sensitizing". The Government member of the United Kingdom explained that this would be consistent with the wording of Paragraph 2(e) of the Recommendation, and would reflect the common understanding that information and sensitization rarely lead to change without mobilization.

348. The Employer members supported the amendment. The Worker members commented that the amendment would have been more properly addressed in clause (b) of the same Paragraph, since they believed that Government members should be interested in helping to strengthen the capacity of employers' and workers' organizations to give effect to the provisions of the Convention. However, they were happy to support the amendment.

349. The amendment was adopted and Paragraph 14(a) was adopted as amended.

Paragraph 14(b) and 14(c)

350. Clauses (b) and (c) were adopted without change.

351. The Government member of Bolivia stated that whilst they had not submitted an amendment to this effect, Paragraph 14(b) would have been more consistent and complete with the addition of the word "national" before the words "civic organizations".

Paragraph 14(d)

352. An amendment submitted by the Government members of Canada and Denmark to delete the Paragraph was withdrawn.

353. An amendment was submitted by the Government members of Ireland, Netherlands and the United Kingdom, to refer to Member's nationals in the singular rather than to "Members' nationals". The Government member of the United Kingdom said that the amendment better reflected the intention that a Member's own nationals would be liable to prosecution in their own country for offences committed elsewhere. However, the plural "Members' " could require member States to prosecute all other member States' nationals, not merely their own.

354. The Worker and Employer members supported the amendment, as did the Government member of Ethiopia. The Government member of Mexico agreed and requested that the Drafting Committee reconsider the Spanish text.

355. The Government member of Pakistan stated that this provision should not prejudice the work on the United Nations draft optional protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography.

356. The amendment was adopted and Paragraph 14(d) was adopted as amended.

Paragraph 14(e)

357. Paragraph 14(e) was adopted without change.

Paragraph 14, proposed new
clause after clause (e)

358. An amendment was submitted by the Worker members to insert a new clause after clause (e), to read as follows: "encouraging the development of policies by undertakings to promote the aims of the Convention;".

359. The Worker members stated that establishments which were seeking to promote policies aimed at the elimination of the worst forms of child labour should be encouraged to do so, within the framework of national legislation. The Worker Vice-Chairperson said that he recognized the limitations of the word "undertakings", and was open to alternatives.

360. The Government member of India stated that, in principle, they were in favour of the amendment, but would prefer an alternative word to "undertakings". The Employer members pointed out that the word "undertakings" was consistent with other ILO instruments, and were happy to support the amendment as it stood. The Government member of India withdrew his reservations since it appeared that there was appropriate precedent for use of the term.

361. The Government members of Mexico, Switzerland and Uruguay drew attention to the terms used in the French and Spanish texts, and requested that the Drafting Committee reconsider those to maintain consistency between the three texts.

362. The amendment was adopted and a new clause following clause (e) was adopted.

Paragraph 14(f)

363. The Worker members submitted an amendment to insert the words "monitoring and" before the words "giving publicity". The amendment was supported by the Committee and adopted.

364. The Government members of China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Lebanon, Malaysia, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea and Singapore submitted an amendment to insert the words "elimination of" before child labour in order to clarify that the best practices were those on the "elimination" of child labour. The amendment was supported by the Committee and adopted.

365. Paragraph 14(f) was adopted as amended.

Paragraph 14(g) and 14(h)

366. Paragraph 14(g) and 14(h) were adopted without change.

Paragraph 14, proposed new

clause after clause (h)

367. The Government members of Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Mexico and Uruguay submitted an amendment to insert a new clause after clause (h) to read: "adopting appropriate measures to improve the educational infrastructure and training of teachers to meet the needs of boys and girls." It was stated that the proposed amendment covered all levels of education, including vocational training, and applied to education offered to children rescued from the worst forms of child labour. Boys and girls were mentioned so that their different needs would be addressed. The amendment was supported by the Employer and Worker members and the Government members of India and the United Kingdom and adopted.

368. The new clause after clause (h) was adopted.

Paragraph 14, proposed new
clause after clause (h)

369. An amendment was submitted by the Government members of Cuba, Guatemala, Mexico and Uruguay, to insert another new clause after clause (h) to read: "taking account, in national action programmes, of job promotion and vocational training for the parents of the boys and girls working in these conditions and of awareness-raising of the parents on the problem." The intention was to highlight the important role of the family in combating the worst forms of child labour by providing them with opportunities for enhanced income and to become more aware of the detrimental effects of work on children. The Government member of Pakistan argued that the objectives set forth in the proposed clause could be difficult to achieve for some developing countries and suggested subamending it by inserting the words "as far as possible" after the words "vocational training". Following discussion, the Government member of Sweden submitted a subamendment to replace the words "boys and girls" by the word "children". This was considered along with other proposed subamendments seeking to widen the scope of the term "parents" by referring variously to "adults in families of the boys and girls", or to "fathers, mothers and other adults in the family". There was general agreement in the Committee on the principle of the proposed changes. The amendment was adopted as subamended to take account "as far as possible" of job promotion and vocational training for parents "and adults" in the families of the children. Because of the complexity of the agreed text, it was referred to the Drafting Committee to improve and reconcile the English, French and Spanish formulations.

370. The new clause after clause (h) was adopted as amended.

371. Paragraph 14 was adopted as amended.

Paragraph 15

372. The Government member of Ethiopia, on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, submitted an amendment to replace the word "or" with the word "and". The Employer members and the Government member of India supported the amendment. The Worker members underscored the need for consistency with Article 8 of the Convention, and therefore proposed replacing the word "and" with "and/or". The Government members of Australia and United States supported this subamendment. Following an indicative show of support, the amendment was adopted as subamended.

373. The Government member of Ethiopia, on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, submitted an amendment to replace the word "immediate" with the word "effective". He said that this was intended to ensure consistency with Articles previously adopted. The Employer and Worker members supported the amendment which was adopted.

374. In light of the adoption of the previous amendment the Government members of China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Lebanon, Malaysia, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea and Singapore withdrew an amendment to delete the word "immediate".

375. The Government member of Ethiopia, on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, submitted an amendment to add the words "complement national efforts and" after the world "should". He explained that the amendment was aimed at ensuring consistency with the text of the Convention. The Worker members accepted this formulation but submitted a subamendment to add the following text: "be developed and implemented in consultation with employers' and workers' organizations. Such cooperation and/or assistance should".

376. The Government member of India opposed the subamendment and argued that the problem of child labour mostly occurred in unorganized sectors where employers' and workers' organizations were not always active. He suggested that governments had a broad responsibility throughout society to promote social and economic development and poverty eradication. He explained that it would not always be feasible for governments to consult with the social partners on these aspects and asked the Worker members to reconsider the subamendment.

377. The Worker members presented some examples of poverty alleviation programmes aimed at the elimination of the worst forms of child labour where national trade union centres or employers' organizations had played a major role. The Government member of Ethiopia stated that the members of the African Group on the Committee disagreed with the subamendment. The Government members of Australia, Bolivia, Dominican Republic, Egypt, New Zealand and Pakistan supported the position expressed by the Government member of India and considered the proposal impractical. The Employer members underscored the constructive role played by their national organizations in implementing programmes of action against child labour and supported the Worker members' subamendment. In a spirit of compromise, the Government member of the United States proposed that the sponsors withdraw the proposed amendment, and return to the original text which also was supported by the Government member of Switzerland.

378. The Government member of India restated his support for the amendment and reaffirmed that international cooperation programmes in the area of eradicating the worst forms of child labour must be in conformity with, and must complement, national programmes. The Employer members expressed surprise at the opposition to tripartite arrangements expressed by many governments, and submitted a subsubamendment to provide that there be consultation with employers' and workers' organizations "as apropriate". The Government member of India suggested "and, as appropriate" be inserted before "national efforts". The Government members of the Dominican Republic and Switzerland and supported the proposal made by the Government member of India.

379. The Government member of Ethiopia, on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, proposed to insert "may" before "as appropriate". The Employer and Worker members agreed to the proposal. The amendment as subamended by the Workers, as subamended by the Government member of India and as further subamended by the members of the African Group on the Committee, was adopted.

380. The introduction of Paragraph 15 was adopted as subamended to read: "International cooperation and/or assistance among Members for the prohibition and effective elimination of the worst forms of child labour should complement national efforts and may, as appropriate, be developed and implemented in consultation with employers' and workers' organizations. Such international cooperation and/or assistance should include:".

Paragraph 15, clauses (a),
(b) and (c)

381. Clauses (a), (b) and (c) were adopted without change.

Paragraph 15, proposed new
clause after clause (c)

382. The Government member of Ethiopia, on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, submitted an amendment to add after clause (c) a new clause to read: "enhanced assistance, including support for social and economic development, poverty eradication programmes and universal education.". He said that the amendment was submitted to keep the text of the Recommendation consistent with the language adopted in Article 8 of the proposed Convention. The Employer and Worker members and the Government members of India and Bolivia supported the amendment. The Government member of the United Kingdom proposed a subamendment to delete the words "enhanced assistance, including" to facilitate the readability of the entire Paragraph. This was supported by the Government members of Netherlands, Switzerland and the United States. The Government member of India submitted a subamendment to insert "Enhanced" at the beginning of Paragraph 15. This subamendment was adopted and the amendment as subamended was adopted. The new clause (d) was adopted as amended to read: "support for social and economic development, poverty eradication programmes and universal education."

383. Paragraph 15 was adopted as amended.

384. The Recommendation as amended was adopted.

385. At the end of the discussion, the Secretary-General of the Conference briefly addressed the members of the Committee. He underscored the historical contribution being made by the work of the Committee. Through this Convention, the ILO would propose a global instrument to combat child labour, with the strong and broad support of the tripartite delegations. The world had been waiting for this Convention which promoted universally accepted values. He believed that the Convention would transcend negotiation and would have a profound direct impact upon the life of many people, particularly children.

Adoption of the report and the proposed
Convention and Recommendation

386. At its twentieth sitting, the Committee adopted its report, subject to changes requested by various members, as well as the proposed Convention and Recommendation as they had been amended by the Drafting Committee. Before presentation of the report, members of the Committee made closing statements.

387. The Employer Vice-Chairperson noted that the discussions in the Committee had been unusual in many ways. There had been little conflict, no votes had been cast, and there was an effort to proceed by consensus. He noted however that the Employer members had been opposed to the reference to child soldiers, the linking of education to the definition of the worst forms of child labour, and the inclusion of NGOs in the consultation process required by the Convention. The Employer members strongly supported the objective of ending the use of children in military or armed forces of any kind. But they believed that the United Nations and its Working group on an optional protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflicts was the appropriate forum to discuss these matters. The Employer members called on the United Nations to speedily end the use of children in wars. The Employer members valued education highly and recognized the important role of education in keeping children out of work. They were concerned, however, that linking education to the definition of the worst forms of child labour would delay ratification of the Convention. The Employers called on States parties which had already committed themselves to the provision of free compulsory education to meet this commitment as soon as possible. They also called on the international community to support this effort. Finally, while the Employer members recognized the important role of NGOs in the fight against child labour, it was important that the tripartite nature of the ILO was not undermined.

388. The Worker Vice-Chairperson expressed his appreciation for the large degree of commitment of the Government and Employer members to the development of a ratifiable and implementable Convention and Recommendation. The new Convention was a human rights Convention, and poverty could not be put forward as an excuse for not ratifying or implementing it. Key to its successful implementation would be the universal provision of at least eight years of basic education. He emphasized the urgency of taking action and called on the international community to strongly cooperate and step up its efforts to provide resources to help eliminate the worst forms of child labour.

389. The Government member of India: My delegation would like to take this opportunity to place on record a few observations regarding the deliberations of this Committee and elements of the draft Convention and Recommendation on the worst forms of child labour.

Allow me to first of all express our deep appreciation to the spokespersons of the Workers’ and Employers’ groups, Mr. Trottman and Mr. Botha, as well as all Government members of this Committee, for participating in these negotiations in a constructive spirit. This has facilitated our search for solutions to the many difficult issues that were before us and has enabled us to forge a consensus. We believe that this will in turn promote greater understanding of the complexity of the issues covered by this draft Convention as well as the practical considerations related to efforts to eliminate the worst forms of child labour.

We would also like to congratulate you, Mr. Chairman, for your most able stewardship of the work of this Committee which has in no small measure contributed to the success of our endeavours.

Further, we would like to express our appreciation to the secretariat for its excellent support which in our view merits special commendation.

At the outset of this meeting, my delegation had stressed the need for an instrument which is implementable and ratifiable, sensitive to the poverty dimension of the phenomenon of child labour in its worst forms, and recognizes that in addition to national action, there must be an element of international cooperation and solidarity to address socio-economic development and to eradicate poverty which is most frequently the root cause of child labour. We had cautioned against inflexible prescriptions, an unduly broad scope and unrealistic or unattainable objectives.

Mr. Chairman, the outcome we have reached does not meet all the concerns that had been raised by my delegation. However, we do believe that it broadly reflects a balance of concerns raised by the tripartite members of this Committee, and, therefore, are prepared to support the draft Convention and Recommendation.

Allow me to offer some observations on the draft text of these instruments.

The title of the document and of the draft Convention as well as Article 1 clearly define the objective of this instrument, which is to address measures for the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour. We believe that this recognition is of critical importance as the phenomenon of the worst forms of child labour, when it is rooted in poverty, cannot be eliminated overnight or merely legislated away. The most effective way of addressing the problem is to progressively eradicate the root cause, which is poverty, through national action and international cooperation. We welcome the fact that these aspects are fully recognized in the draft Convention. At the same time, we recognize in equal measure the need to undertake immediate steps for the elimination of the worst forms of child labour, and to deal with this issue as a matter of urgency.

390. We had supported the need for a clear and well-defined scope of the draft Convention. The definitions of the worst forms of child labour which are to be covered by this draft Convention, as contained in Article 3, continue to be rather broad. However, we welcome the fact that this Article reaffirms a number of fundamental political and civil rights of the child which must be enforced in all circumstances. In the area of hazardous work where child labour is most likely to be rooted in poverty, determination of the worst forms is to be made by competent national authorities after consultation with tripartite partners at the national level. This will provide the instrument with a measure of flexibility as well as the capacity to address the specificities of the situation prevailing in each national context.

391. Articles 5, 6 and 7 address national responsibility for giving effect to the provisions of the draft Convention. We have noted the emphasis placed on education as an essential component of the removal of children from the worst forms of child labour and their durable rehabilitation.

Regarding access to education, we would like to stress that governmental responsibility lies in facilitating the availability of this economic and social right in a progressive and developmental context, an aspect fully recognized by Article 28 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The implementation of goals such as free and compulsory basic education must also be seen in conjunction with national economic circumstances and the availability of resources as provided under Article 2 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, including through enhanced international cooperation and assistance.

My delegation would like to reiterate that this draft Convention does not create any new binding obligations in respect of economic and social rights which by their nature cannot be legally guaranteed and enforced. That these rights can be fully realized only in a progressive manner is well recognized under international human rights law, and it is our belief that the implementation of this draft Convention must also conform to relevant international standards established by the International Covenant on ESC Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

In this context, we would once again like to make it clear that the symptoms of poverty do not constitute deliberate violations of human rights by states. Virtually all forms of child labour which involve the absence of the child from school are rooted in poverty, parental unemployment or underemployment, or parental illiteracy. It is not possible to penalize such absence from school because this would involve penalizing or imposing sanctions on poverty. It would also be tantamount to labelling poverty as the worst form of child labour. This phenomenon cannot be eliminated by condemning poverty. We are firmly convinced that the ILO, as an organization committed to social progress and social justice and recognizing that poverty anywhere is a threat to prosperity everywhere, will never embrance arguments that undermine its fundamental objectives and evade the shared responsibility of all its Members to secure them.

The ultimate answer to the problem of child labour lies in the eradication of poverty, unemployment and illiteracy by progressively securing the realization of economic and social rights. This is a long-standing goal to which the ILO must recommit itself with renewed vigour. Only multi-dimensional strategies that provide access to educational opportunities, open avenues for gainful employment for parents, eradicate parental illiteracy, and ensure the protection of all rights of the child contained in the Convention on the Rights of the Child, can eventually eliminate the worst forms of child labour, wherever it occurs as a symptom of poverty.

My delegation attaches particular importance to Article 8 of the draft Convention. We welcome the fact that the language of this Article has been considerably strengthened to explicitly endorse international cooperation and assistance for eradicating poverty, promoting socio-economic development and realizing universal education. We would like to reiterate that the obligation contained in this Article is no different from those arising from other articles that define national responsibilities, and that in the overall context of eradicating poverty as a root cause of child labour, obligations for national action and international cooperation contained in this draft Convention are indivisible and inter-related.

392. Mr. Chairman, my delegation attaches importance to the problem of the involvement of children in armed conflict. Such involvement can cause irreparable harm to the psyche of the child and invariably threatens the child’s right to life. We would have preferred to see stronger language in the text of the draft Convention. While noting that this issue is dealt with in the context of forced or compulsory recruitment, we believe that the relevant provision in the draft Convention is without prejudice to a more comprehensive treatment of the matter through an optional Protocol of the CRC on the involvement of children in armed conflict, the early conclusion of which we strongly support.

393. The draft Convention and Recommendation contain references to consultation required to be undertaken by national authorities. We respect the tripartite nature of the ILO and would like to affirm that the obligation to undertake such consultations relates only to employers’ and workers’ organizations. Thereafter, the responsibility for decision-making rests with the competent national authorities alone. While we attach importance to the views of civil society at large, we would not like to see the erosion of the tripartite structure of the ILO. We have also pointed out the practical difficulties regarding some of the elements in the draft Recommendation which call for wider consultation. Our clear preference would have been to avoid elements which raise difficulties of a practical nature and are unimplementable. We believe that insertion of such language can only erode the value of the Recommendation.

394. We have heard with attention issues which have been raised by some delegations related to “hidden work” or “domestic work”. These are relatively new concepts which are yet to be clearly understood and defined within the tripartite structures of the ILO. They should not be confused with the worst forms of child labour. We also believe that the situations of “special risk” referred to in the draft Convention and Recommendation should not be seen as incorporating the undefined concepts of “hidden” or “domestic work”.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, allow me to reaffirm that my Government is committed to the full eradication of all forms of child labour, beginning with its most exploitative and hazardous forms. We see the new instrument on the worst forms of child labour which this Committee has drafted as a culmination of initiatives which my Government has supported in the International Labour Conference since 1996. As the Director-General of the ILO has stated, this Committee has been entrusted with a historic opportunity. We believe that we have not failed the children of the world whose tender years are crushed and lives blighted by the worst forms of child labour. We would like to express the hope that this draft Convention will provide a major impetus to national action and international cooperation and assistance to eradicate the worst forms of child labour. There is nothing more precious for any nation or society than the protection and well-being of its children and their capacity to achieve their full potential as adults. This recognition must underpin our efforts, individual and collective, to give effect to the provisions of this draft Convention.

395. The Government member of the Netherlands, on behalf of the Government members of Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, San Marino, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States, expressed satisfaction with the work carried out by the Committee in reaching a satisfactory compromise text for a Convention and a Recommendation and considered the major relevant issues were adequately reflected.

396. The instruments represented a first step towards the setting of international standards on the issue of child soldiers. A basis had been laid for the Working group on the optional protocol to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child on involvement of children in armed conflicts to make further progress.

397. The Government member of the Netherlands, speaking on behalf of the abovementioned member States, reiterated their full commitment to tripartism and welcomed the agreement to involve other groups that work towards the aims of the Convention in the design and implementation of programmes of action. She assured the Committee that IMEC members would continue to be fully committed to the principle of all members assisting one another in giving effect to the provisions of the Convention on the worst forms of child labour through international cooperation and/or assistance. It was their understanding, based upon the opinion of the Legal Adviser, that Article 8 of the Convention addressed the need for all members to work together to meet the goals of the Convention.

398. The Government member of the Netherlands recognized that child labour was to a great extent caused by poverty and that in its turn child labour perpetuated poverty. The members of the Committee should acknowledge, however, that poverty could under no circumstances be used as an excuse for condoning the worst forms of child labour. She strongly endorsed the enhanced emphasis in the Convention on the crucial role of education and vocational training in the elimination of child labour. She considered this Convention to be one of the ILO's fundamental labour standards and that it should be included in the campaign to promote ratification of fundamental labour standards.

399. The Government member of Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee, reiterated their wholehearted support the Committee for the adoption of the new Convention and Recommendation. He expressed their satisfaction that the Committee had adopted the instruments without a vote after making the necessary compromises. He noted that the report reflected the understandings and positions of the members of the African Group on the Committee on some issues.

400. The Government member of Pakistan: I would like to congratulate this Committee for its success in ensuring that the 87th Session of the International Labour Conference adopts the Convention and the Recommendation on the worst forms of child labour. All concerned have worked very hard to achieve consensus through compromises from all sides. The final draft before us today may not be the best document from the point of view of all concerned, but it does attempt to deal with all the questions that need answers for the elimination of the worst forms of child labour.

Our delegation has repeatedly said in all discussions, and during the negotiating process on the draft Convention and Recommendation that it was essential to focus on the objective of the entire exercise. The objective was to have a Convention which deals with the worst forms of child labour. We were, therefore, concerned during the negotiating process, when at times, we appeared to lose focus of our objective and tried to extend into areas that dealt with child labour per se and not with its worst forms only. We would sincerely hope that in the implementation of the Convention all concerned would continue to concentrate on the worst forms of child labour and not attempt to extend its import to areas that are beyond its framework.

A unanimous concern expressed by all participants during the negotiating process, that the new Convention should be flexible and not overly prescriptive, must also be borne in mind in the implementation of the Convention. Such display of flexibility by all concerned would ensure the greatest number of ratifications of the Convention by ILO constituent states. In this context, we would like to refer, once again, to the comment by the United States delegation in its submission to the Office, that any work proposed to be banned in addition to bonded labour and work in the sex and drug industries, must be of the same severity as these imminently harmful and readily identifiable categories. This comment would greatly assist us in the identification of what falls under the definition of “hazardous work”. We also agree with them that the aim of the Convention clearly is the elimination of the worst forms of child labour i.e. work that is the most harmful and performed by the most vulnerable children. It is clear to us that the definition of hazardous work as included in the Recommendation being adopted with the Convention must not be interpreted loosely. It is important that each country in consultation with workers and employers determine such work, bearing in mind the economic, social and developmental levels. It is our objective to achieve the elimination of the worst forms of child labour and not to use the definition to disallow children to work with their families in the agricultural sector.

The flexibility provided in Paragraph 4 of the Recommendation with regard to the definition of the child under Article 2 of the Convention, and the importance of allowing the competent authority within a country, after consultations with workers and employers concerned, to authorize employment or work, as from the age of 16 years under specific conditions, would greatly assist developing countries. Such flexibility would ensure greater ratification.

We must also underscore the fact that a Recommendation to a Convention only provides guidance to member States on the implementation of the Convention and is not binding on them. This has been clarified in article 19 of the ILO Constitution. The Recommendation cannot be considered to become legally binding by virtue of the language in Paragraph 1 of the Recommendation which says that the provisions of this Recommendation supplement those of the Convention and should be “applied in conjunction with them”. The Office has categorically confirmed this in Report IV(2A).

We fully appreciate the underlying concern to provide support and assistance to families of children involved in the worst forms of child labour. A number of programmes being undertaken in Pakistan, in the context of the elimination of child labour, do take this concern into account. It must, nevertheless, be stated for the record that some of the obligations on member States with regard to providing assistance and support to families of children may be somewhat difficult to implement, especially by developing countries.

The provisions of Article 8 of the Convention recognize the importance of shared international responsibility towards the elimination of the worst forms of child labour through programmes of cooperation and assistance. These programmes must take a holistic view of the problem of child labour. Child labour cannot be considered as an isolated tragedy that takes place without any relevance to the overall economic situation of some countries. The Preamble of the Convention recognizes the linkages between poverty and child labour and paragraph 8 of the Convention underscores the obligations at the international level to assist countries in eliminating the worst forms of child labour.

Pakistan, Mr. Chairman, is committed to the elimination of child labour. We have undertaken extensive programmes in the context of ILO-IPEC, through bilateral efforts as well as efforts by the Government and employers to deal with this problem. Out commitment to work towards the agreed target within the SARC region to eliminate child labour by the year 2010 is visible also at the highest political level. Pakistan is perhaps amongst the few countries where financial assistance is provided by the Government through its own funds to contribute towards the elimination of child labour.

We, therefore, welcome the adoption of an instrument which will assist countries in taking measures for the elimination of the worst forms of child labour. In this context, we appreciate the recognition by those involved in the work on this Convention, that child labour or even its worst forms, cannot be wished away with one stroke of the pen. We must express our appreciation to the Workers’ and Employers’ groups for their understanding that all cases of worst forms of child labour would not disappear immediately, but that immediate and effective measures need to be taken to secure the prohibition and subsequent elimination of the worst forms of child labour.

401. The Government member of the United Kingdom stated her support of the adoption of this new ILO Convention, and believed that it would be both effective and widely ratifiable. She noted the compromises made but did not believe they would detract from the role that the Convention would have in enhancing the protection of children affected by the worst forms of child labour, and in promoting the best interests of the child. She believed that the commitments to appropriate consultation with all groups affected by the worst forms of child labour, and to enhanced cooperation between member countries would greatly increase the possibilities for maximizing the effectiveness, efficiency and impact of national and international interventions aimed at combating the worst forms of child labour. Nevertheless, there were issues which had caused some concern. In particular, she stated that the United Kingdom cared deeply about the problem of child soldiers. She stated that the current minimum international age standard on recruitment and participation in armed conflicts was too low. The forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict was undoubtedly one of the worst forms of child labour and the Government member of the United Kingdom considered that this aspect of the child soldiers issue came within the ambit of the new Convention and that including it would not prejudice the work currently on the abovementioned optional protocol. The Government member of the United Kingdom believed that the enlistment of volunteers in the armed forces was fundamentally different from the abusive, exploitative, forced or coercive involvement of children in armed conflict.

402. The Government member of the United Kingdom also expressed concern about the issue of child domestic workers but she recognized that there were enormous difficulties in defining what was meant by "hidden work". She believed that there were now provisions within the text of the Convention which would offer protection to children exploited in domestic work, and believed that implementation of the Convention would improve the possibilities for all countries to bring "hidden work" into the light and to fight against it in its worst forms. She also welcomed the strengthened references in the text to the crucial importance of education in the elimination of harmful child labour.

403. The Government member of the United States: First, let me associate myself with the remarks of the Netherlands concerning the scope and application of the Convention.

As we all know, the Committee dealt responsibly and effectively with a number of very difficult issues. We have a Convention that we can be proud of — and one that can be widely ratified.

I want to specially commend the Workers’ and the Employers’ groups for their ability to work together and to help keep the Government members on the right course. On issues like hazardous work, child soldiers, family and small farms, and basic education — just to name a few — it was cooperation between the workers and employers that let us agree and compromise positions and avoid potential and unnecessary obstacles. I thank Mr. Trottman and Mr. Botha for all of their efforts. We share their views and understandings. Let me also thank the Government group coordinators, especially our coordinator, Alette van Leur of the Netherlands, for their skill and dedication.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, let me thank you and the Office staff for your leadership, expertise and — not least — your patience.

404. The Government member of the Dominican Republic expressed the commitment of his Government to ratifying the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999. He noted that all members of the Committee had the task of convincing the members of their respective law-making bodies and judiciaries to be committed to eliminating the worst forms of child labour. He stated that if any member's culture or law promoted the existence of the worst forms of child labour then they had the task of ensuring that it was changed.

405. The Government member of Chile, speaking on behalf of the Government members of Argentina and Brazil, supported the adoption of the Convention and quoted the Secretary-General who had noted the historical contribution of this Convention. He stated that they were disappointed that, despite their efforts, there had not been greater emphasis on education in the Convention. He referred to Article 32 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and welcomed the reference in the Recommendation to adopting appropriate measures to improve the educational infrastructure and the training of teachers. He hoped the instruments would be effective in their aims and would be ratified by as many member States as possible.

406. The Government member of the Russian Federation stated that the new instruments belonged among the core standards of the ILO and were major instruments for the protection of human rights. He noted that the weakest point was the inclusion of the provision on children in armed conflict.

407. The Government representative of South Africa considered that the new Convention was a meaningful, realistic and balanced text, which accommodated all views and opinions without compromising its basic object of prohibiting and taking immediate action for the elimination of the worst forms of child labour. The Convention would strengthen and reinforce the principle of tripartism and social dialogue, which was necessary for the campaign against the worst forms of child labour. He believed that the compromise text regarding child soldiers would have some impact in removing children from armed hostilities but he would have preferred stronger language since thousands of children were forced to volunteer owing to poverty and economic necessity. He urged governments to assist the work on an optional protocol to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflicts. He reiterated that new instruments supplemented Convention No. 138, which remained the fundamental instrument on the total abolition of child labour. The Convention was one of the core ILO Conventions that came within the scope of the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up. He reiterated the importance of technical cooperation, within the framework of the IPEC programme.

408. The Government member of Bolivia supported the new instruments, but stated that the issue of the age to which the provisions of the Convention applied might lead to difficulties, as national traditions and economies differed on the age at which an individual ceased to be considered a child. He considered that a clearer distinction should have been drawn between hazardous work and the exploitation of children in slavery and similar practices, in prostitution and pornography, and in illicit activities, in which the perpetrators were the criminals but the children were the victims.

409. The Government member of France stated her Government's satisfaction but felt that there remained some issues of concern, notably that of child soldiers, which had been only partially addressed. She concluded by stating that this Convention should be one of the core ILO standards which came within the scope of the ILO's Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up.

410. The Government member of Belgium supported the statement of France and stated that this Convention should be seen as a lever to the ratification and implementation of Convention No. 138, and called on members to promote its ratification and implementation.

411. The Government member of Venezuela stated that whilst he welcomed the new Convention he regretted that some basic principles had not been included. He agreed with the Government member of Chile that the exclusion of a reference to the systematic denial of access to basic education in the definition of the worst forms of child labour was a particular shortcoming. He noted that, while areas such as prostitution, slavery and trafficking, and involvement in illicit activities were, on the whole, already legislated against, the definition of hazardous work was not. He concluded that for action against the worst forms of child labour to be implemented effectively, workers' and employers' organizations would have to be consulted.

412. The Government member of Morocco endorsed the statement of the Government member of Ethiopia speaking on behalf of the members of the African Group on the Committee. He welcomed, in particular, the commitment expressed with regard to international cooperation and/or assistance for national efforts aimed at eliminating the worst forms of child labour, but stated that this should not be conducted in such a way that it interfered with national efforts.

413. The Government member of Italy supported the statement of the Government member of the Netherlands on behalf of the members of the IMEC Group on the Committee. He said that he would have preferred to have seen the Committee move further forward on the issue of child soldiers but was happy that the United Nations Working Groups' work on an optional protocol to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child on involvement of children in armed conflicts was continuing to address this issue. He concluded by appealing for universal ratification.

414. The Government member of Cuba supported the adoption of the Convention and Recommendation. However she had reservations about the manner in which the issue of children in armed conflict was addressed, as she considered that all involvement of children in armed conflicts should have been banned. However, work on an optional protocol to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child on involvement of children in armed conflict would continue to strive towards this end. She commented that the involvement of children in the worst forms of child labour was a problem affecting every country, regardless of the level of development. Whilst poverty was not the only causal factor for this, there was a direct relationship between poverty and the worst forms of child labour. Support through international assistance and cooperation was necessary, and, together with national action, would help overcome the difficulties of the elimination of the worst forms of child labour.

415. The Government member of Algeria stated that adoption of a new Convention and Recommendation on the worst forms of child labour was coming at a very difficult time in her country and great efforts would be required to implement the provisions of the Convention. In particular, there was a great need for technical cooperation and her Government regretted that, in this context, not enough emphasis had been placed on this subject.

416. The Government member of Lebanon expressed that the term “child” as indicating a person who is under the age of 18 is not in consistency with the terms used in the Lebanese Labour Code whereby a person between the ages of 14 and 18 is called adolescent and children under the age of 14 are prohibited to work. The Government member of Lebanon also stated that the provisions of point 4 of the Recommendation should have been a subparagraph of Article 3 of the Convention as was the case with Article 3, paragraph 3, of Convention No. 138.

She also expressed her opinion that reference to relevant international standards in Article 4 of the Convention was not welcomed since Conventions are initially independent. Such reference could be made in the Preamble which has actually recognized relevant international labour standards. She thanked the Legal Adviser for his legal opinion and considered that they should be the basis for future interpretations. On point 15(d) she stated that bilateral agreements should be signed if extradition was to be considered, and wondered whether the questions of extra-territoriality or double conviction could be raised in this respect. She raised concern on the linkage between the Convention and the Recommendation as stated in the Preamble of the Recommendation: “in conjunction”. She further noted that it would have been preferable had the Convention defined the scope for its application to avoid future misinterpretations.

417. The Government member of Paraguay, speaking on behalf of the countries of MERCOSUR (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay) commented that the Ministers of Labour for these countries had, on 8 June 1999, signed a Declaration to strengthen their Governments' commitment to the elimination of the worst forms of child labour.

418. The Government member of Rwanda expressed his Government's support for a new Convention. Its full implementation required the full involvement of social partners, and in this context there was an important role to be played by NGOs as they were often in the best possible position to reach those children involved in the worst forms of child labour. NGOs should therefore be involved in all measures targeting the worst forms of child labour.

419. The Government member of Egypt referred to his previous concluding intervention and the need for efforts at all levels aimed at the elimination of all forms of child labour through the eradication of poverty. He stated that this Convention did not include domestic work, nor did it cover the issue of denial of access to education. He strongly supported the new Convention and believed that it complemented Convention No. 138. Its ratification should not weaken the resolve of member States to ratify the minimum age Convention. He reaffirmed Egypt’s commitment to ban the worst forms of child labour.

420. Before it was adopted, the Reporter presented the report of the Committee's work which synthesized the discussion and contained the text of the draft Convention and Recommendation. She introduced it as a comprehensive account of the Committee's work which historians and legal experts would be able to use to understand the context within which the Convention was developed.

421. The Reporter pointed out that the Drafting Committee had considered questions which the Committee had referred to it and had made some drafting changes to the proposed Convention and Recommendation. Most of these were linguistic or stylistic, or were intended to align the English and French versions of the text.

422. The first change was in Article 7, paragraph 2(b), where the text was edited to clarify the reference to the removal of children from the worst forms of child labour and for their rehabilitation and social reintegration. Among the drafting changes to align the French and English texts, the Drafting Committee felt that the reference to "de toute urgence" in Article 1 should also be at the end of the sentence as in the English text; that the complete French phrase of "the worst forms of child labour", that is "les pire formes de travail des enfants", should be used; and in Article 7, paragraph 1, it was felt that "par l'établissement et l'application de sanctions pénales" better captured the meaning of the English text which read "including the provision and application of penal sanctions".

423. In the Recommendation, the Drafting Committee was concerned about both the use and translation of "the girl child" in Paragraph 2(b)(ii). Members were conscious that the term "girl child" had a narrower interpretation in the United Nations parlance than what was intended by the Committee in the context of the new draft instruments. It was clear in English that it applied to all girls under the age of 18, but the French translation might have implied a younger age. The Drafting Committee therefore translated "the girl child" into French to read "aux enfants de sexe féminin" which was considered to be accurate to the intention of the Committee.

424. In Paragraph 14, the Drafting Committee had qualified the word "remedies" to read "criminal, civil or administrative remedies" because it became clear that without such qualification, the interpretation could be different in different legal systems. The Drafting Committee had also redrafted Paragraph 15(k) which was a little longer than the amended text proposed but expressed more clearly the intentions of the Committee.

425. The Chairperson thanked the members of the Committee for their cooperation, constructive spirit and seriousness of purpose. He expressed great satisfaction and joy for the work carried out and underscored the fact that the Committee had reached a full consensus on the adoption of the instruments.

426. The report of the Committee and the proposed Convention and Recommendation concerning the prohibition and immediate action for the elimination of the worst forms of child labour are submitted for consideration.

Geneva, 14 June 1999.

(Signed) A. Atsain,
Chairperson.

M. Niven,
Reporter.

1. The modifications were as follows:

(a) 3 June: 232 members (99 Governments entitled to vote with 1,378 votes each, 53 Employer members with 2,574 votes each and 78 Worker members with 1,749 votes each);

(b) 4 June: 205 members (106 Governments entitled to vote with 22 votes each, 53 Employer members with 44 votes each and 44 Worker members with 53 votes each);

(c) 5 June: 192 members (105 Governments entitled to vote with 1,763 votes each, 43 Employer members with 4,305 votes each and 41 Worker members with 4,515 votes each);

(d) 7 June: 192 members (106 Governments entitled to vote with 1,763 votes each, 43 Employer members with 4,346 votes each and 41 Worker members with 4,558 votes each);

(e) 8 June: 186 members (108 Governments entitled to vote with 119 votes each, 42 Employer members with 306 votes each and 34 Worker members with 378 votes each);

(f) 9 June: 179 members (110 Governments entitled to vote with 111 votes each, 37 Employer members with 330 votes each and 30 Worker members with 407 votes each);

(g) 10 June: 179 members (111 Governments entitled to vote with 532 votes each, 38 Employer members with 1,554 votes each and 28 Worker members with 2,109 votes each);

(h) 11 June: 174 members (111 Governments entitled to vote with 300 votes each, 36 Employer members with 925 votes each and 25 Worker members with 1,332 votes each);

(i) 14 June: 173 members (111 Governments entitled to vote with 175 votes each, 35 Employer members with 555 votes each and 25 Worker members with 777 votes each).

A. Proposed Convention concerning the prohibition
and immediate action for the elimination of the
worst forms of child labour

The General Conference of the International Labour Organization,

Having been convened at Geneva by the Governing Body of the International Labour Office, and having met in its 87th Session on 1 June 1999, and

Considering the need to adopt new instruments for the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour, as the main priority for national and international action, including international cooperation and assistance, to complement the Convention and Recommendation concerning minimum age for admission to employment, 1973, which remain fundamental instruments on child labour, and

Considering that the effective elimination of the worst forms of child labour requires immediate and comprehensive action, taking into account the importance of free basic education and the need to remove the children concerned from all such work and to provide for their rehabilitation and social integration while addressing the needs of their families, and

Recalling the resolution concerning the elimination of child labour adopted by the International Labour Conference at its 83rd Session in 1996, and

Recognizing that child labour is to a great extent caused by poverty and that the long-term solution lies in sustained economic growth leading to social progress, in particular poverty alleviation and universal education, and

Recalling the Convention on the Rights of the Child adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 20 November 1989, and

Recalling the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up, adopted by the International Labour Conference at its 86th Session in 1998, and

Recalling that some of the worst forms of child labour are covered by other international instruments, in particular the Forced Labour Convention, 1930, and the United Nations Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery, 1956, and

Having decided upon the adoption of certain proposals with regard to child labour, which is the fourth item on the agenda of the session, and

Having determined that these proposals shall take the form of an international Convention;

adopts this ... day of June of the year one thousand nine hundred and ninety-nine the following Convention, which may be cited as the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999.

Article 1

Each Member which ratifies this Convention shall take immediate and effective measures to secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour as a matter of urgency.

Article 2

For the purposes of this Convention, the term "child" shall apply to all persons under the age of 18.

Article 3

For the purposes of this Convention, the expression "the worst forms of child labour" comprises:

(a) all forms of slavery or practices similar to slavery, such as the sale and trafficking of children, debt bondage and serfdom and forced or compulsory labour, including forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict;

(b) the use, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution, for the production of pornography or for pornographic performances;

(c) the use, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities, in particular for the production and trafficking of drugs as defined in the relevant international treaties;

(d) work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children.

Article 4

1. The types of work referred to under Article 3(d) shall be determined by national laws or regulations or by the competent authority, after consultation with the organizations of employers and workers concerned, taking into consideration relevant international standards, in particular Paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Worst Forms of Child Labour Recommendation, 1999.

2. The competent authority, after consultation with the organizations of employers and workers concerned, shall identify where the types of work so determined exist.

3. The list of the types of work determined under paragraph 1 of this Article shall be periodically examined and revised as necessary, in consultation with the organizations of employers and workers concerned.

Article 5

Each Member shall, after consultation with employers' and workers' organizations, establish or designate appropriate mechanisms to monitor the implementation of the provisions giving effect to this Convention.

Article 6

1. Each Member shall design and implement programmes of action to eliminate as a priority the worst forms of child labour.

2. Such programmes of action shall be designed and implemented in consultation with relevant government institutions and employers' and workers' organizations, taking into consideration the views of other concerned groups as appropriate.

Article 7

1. Each Member shall take all necessary measures to ensure the effective implementation and enforcement of the provisions giving effect to this Convention including the provision and application of penal sanctions or, as appropriate, other sanctions.

2. Each Member shall, taking into account the importance of education in eliminating child labour, take effective and time-bound measures to:

(a) prevent the engagement of children in the worst forms of child labour;

(b) provide the necessary and appropriate direct assistance for the removal of children from the worst forms of child labour and for their rehabilitation and social integration;

(c) ensure access to free basic education, and, wherever possible and appropriate, vocational training, for all children removed from the worst forms of child labour;

(d) identify and reach out to children at special risk; and

(e) take account of the special situation of girls.

3. Each Member shall designate the competent authority responsible for the implementation of the provisions giving effect to this Convention.

Article 8

Members shall take appropriate steps to assist one another in giving effect to the provisions of this Convention through enhanced international cooperation and/or assistance including support for social and economic development, poverty eradication programmes and universal education.

B. Proposed Recommendation concerning the prohibition
and immediate action for the elimination of the
worst forms of child labour

The General Conference of the International Labour Organization,

Having been convened at Geneva by the Governing Body of the International Labour Office, and having met in its 87th Session on 1 June 1999, and

Having adopted the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999, and

Having decided upon the adoption of certain proposals with regard to child labour, which is the fourth item on the agenda of the session, and

Having determined that these proposals shall take the form of a Recommendation supplementing the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999;

adopts this ... day of June of the year one thousand nine hundred and ninety-nine the following Recommendation, which may be cited as the Worst Forms of Child Labour Recommendation, 1999.

1. The provisions of this Recommendation supplement those of the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (hereafter referred to as "the Convention"), and should be applied in conjunction with them.

I. Programmes of action

2. The programmes of action referred to in Article 6 of the Convention should be designed and implemented as a matter of urgency, in consultation with relevant government institutions and employers' and workers' organizations, taking into consideration the views of the children directly affected by the worst forms of child labour, their families and, as appropriate, other concerned groups committed to the aims of the Convention and this Recommendation. Such programmes should aim at, inter alia:

(a) identifying and denouncing the worst forms of child labour;

(b) preventing the engagement of children in or removing them from the worst forms of child labour, protecting them from reprisals and providing for their rehabilitation and social integration through measures which address their educational, physical and psychological needs;

(i) younger children;

(ii) the girl child;

(iii) the problem of hidden work situations, in which girls are at special risk;

(iv) other groups of children with special vulnerabilities or needs;

(d) identifying, reaching out to and working with communities where children are at special risk;

(e) informing, sensitizing and mobilizing public opinion and concerned groups, including children and their families.

II. Hazardous work

3. In determining the types of work referred to under Article 3(d) of the Convention, and in identifying where they exist, consideration should be given, inter alia, to:

(a) work which exposes children to physical, psychological or sexual abuse;

(b) work underground, under water, at dangerous heights or in confined spaces;

(c) work with dangerous machinery, equipment and tools, or which involves the manual handling or transport of heavy loads;

(d) work in an unhealthy environment which may, for example, expose children to hazardous substances, agents or processes, or to temperatures, noise levels, or vibrations damaging to their health;

(e) work under particularly difficult conditions such as work for long hours or during the night or work where the child is unreasonably confined to the premises of the employer.

4. For the types of work referred to under Article 3(d) of the Convention and Paragraph 3 above, national laws or regulations or the competent authority could, after consultation with the workers' and employers' organizations concerned, authorize employment or work as from the age of 16 on condition that the health, safety and morals of the children concerned are fully protected, and that the children have received adequate specific instruction or vocational training in the relevant branch of activity.

III. Implementation

5. (1) Detailed information and statistical data on the nature and extent of child labour should be compiled and kept up to date to serve as a basis for determining priorities for national action for the abolition of child labour, in particular for the prohibition and elimination of its worst forms as a matter of urgency.

(2) As far as possible, such information and statistical data should include data disaggregated by sex, age group, occupation, branch of economic activity, status in employment, school attendance and geographical location. The importance of an effective system of birth registration, including the issuing of birth certificates, should be taken into account.

(3) Relevant data concerning violations of national provisions for the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour should be compiled and kept up to date.

6. The compilation and processing of the information and data referred to in Paragraph 5 above should be carried out with due regard for the right to privacy.

7. The information compiled under Paragraph 5 above should be communicated to the International Labour Office on a regular basis.

8. Members should establish or designate appropriate national mechanisms to monitor the implementation of national provisions for the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour after consultation with employers' and workers' organizations.

9. Members should ensure that the competent authorities which have responsibilities for implementing national provisions for the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour cooperate with each other and coordinate their activities.

10. National laws or regulations or the competent authority should determine the persons to be held responsible in the event of non-compliance with national provisions for the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour.

11. Members should, in so far as it is compatible with national law, cooperate with international efforts aimed at the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour as a matter of urgency by:

(a) gathering and exchanging information concerning criminal offences, including those involving international networks;

(b) detecting and prosecuting those involved in the sale and trafficking of children, or in the use, procuring or offering of children for illicit activities, for prostitution, for the production of pornography or for pornographic performances;

12. Members should provide that the following worst forms of child labour are criminal offences:

(b) the use, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution, for the production of pornography or for pornographic performances; and

(c) the use, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities, in particular for the production and trafficking of drugs as defined in the relevant international treaties, or for activities which involve the unlawful carrying or use of firearms or other weapons.

13. Members should ensure that penalties including, where appropriate, criminal penalties are applied for violations of the national provisions for the prohibition and elimination of any type of work referred to in Article 3(d) of the Convention.

14. Members should also provide as a matter of urgency for other criminal, civil or administrative remedies, where appropriate, to ensure the effective enforcement of national provisions for the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour, such as special supervision of enterprises which have used the worst forms of child labour, and, in cases of persistent violation, consideration of temporary or permanent revoking of permits to operate.

15. Other measures aimed at the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour might include the following:

(a) informing, sensitizing and mobilizing the general public, including national and local political leaders, parliamentarians and the judiciary;

(b) involving and training employers' and workers' organizations and civic organizations;

(c) providing appropriate training for the government officials concerned, especially inspectors and law enforcement officials, and for other relevant professionals;

(d) providing for the prosecution in their own country of the Member's nationals who commit offences under its national provisions for the prohibition and immediate elimination of the worst forms of child labour even when these offences are committed in another country;

(e) simplifying legal and administrative procedures and ensuring that they are appropriate and prompt;

(f) encouraging the development of policies by undertakings to promote the aims of the Convention;

(g) monitoring and giving publicity to best practices on the elimination of child labour;

(h) giving publicity to legal or other provisions on child labour in the different languages or dialects;

(i) establishing special complaints procedures and making provisions to protect from discrimination and reprisals those who legitimately expose violations of the provisions of the Convention, as well as establishing helplines or points of contact and ombudspersons;

(j) adopting appropriate measures to improve the educational infrastructure and the training of teachers to meet the needs of boys and girls;

(k) as far as possible taking into account, in national programmes of action, the need for job creation and vocational training for the parents and adults in the families of children working in the conditions covered by the Convention, and the need for sensitizing parents on the problem of children working in such conditions.

16. Enhanced international cooperation and/or assistance among Members for the prohibition and effective elimination of the worst forms of child labour should complement national efforts and may, as appropriate, be developed and implemented in consultation with employers' and workers' organizations. Such international cooperation and/or assistance should include:

(a) mobilizing resources for national or international programmes;

(b) mutual legal assistance;

(d) support for social and economic development, poverty eradication programmes and universal education.

Updated by HK. Approved by RH. Last update: 26 January 2000.