I.

Introduction

1. The Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, appointed by the Governing Body of the International Labour Office to examine the information and reports submitted under articles 19, 22 and 35 of the Constitution by States Members of the International Labour Organization on the action taken with regard to Conventions and Recommendations, held its 64th Session in Geneva from 10 to 25 February 1994. The Committee has the honour to present its report to the Governing Body.

2. The Committee noted that Messrs. S. IVANOV and A.J. SUVIRANTA had ceased to be members. It paid tribute to the contribution that they had made to the work of the Committee for many years.

3. The Governing Body had appointed Ms. R.A. LAYTON and Mr. R.Z. LIVSHITZ members of the Committee. The Committee was pleased to welcome them to its present session.

4. The present composition of the Committee is as follows:

Mr. Benjamin AARON (United States), Professor Emeritus of Law and former Director of the Institute of Industrial Relations, University of California, Los Angeles; former President, National Academy of Arbitrators; former President, Industrial Relations Research Association; former member of the Arbitration Services Advisory Committee of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service; former member of the Public Review Board of the United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers' Union; former President of the International Society of Labour Law and Social Security;

Mr. Roberto AGO (Italy), Judge of the International Court of Justice; Emeritus Professor of International Law, Faculty of Law, University of Rome; former member and President of the United Nations International Law Commission; President of the Vienna Conference for the Codification of the Law on Treaties (1968-69); former Chairman of the ILO Governing Body; Chairman of the Committee on Freedom of Association of the ILO Governing Body; former President of the Institute of International Law; President of the Curatorium of the Academy of International Law at The Hague; member of the Permanent Court of Arbitration;

Mrs. Badria AL-AWADHI (Kuwait), Barrister-at-Law; former Dean of the Faculty of Law, Kuwait; former Professor of Public International Law, Kuwait University; member of the International Commission of Jurists; Vice-President of the International Federation of Women Lawyers; member of the International Law Association; member of the International Council of Environmental Law; member of the Arab Court of Arbitration;

Mr. Prafullachandra Natvarlal BHAGWATI (India), Former Chief Justice of India; former Chief Justice of the High Court of Gujarat; former Chairman, Legal Aid Committee and Judicial Reforms Committee, Government of Gujarat; former Chairman, Committee on Juridicare, Government of India; former Chairman of the Committee appointed by the Government of India for implementing legal aid schemes in the country; member of the International Committee on Human Rights of the International Law Association; member of the Editorial Committee of Reports of the Commonwealth; Chairman of the National Committee for Social and Economic Welfare of the Government of India; Ombudsman for the national newspaper Times of India; Chairman of the Advisory Board of the Centre for Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Geneva; Vice-President of El Taller; Chairman of the Panel for Social Audit of Telecom and Postal Services in India;

The Right Honourable Sir William DOUGLAS, PC, KCMG (Barbados), Former Ambassador; former Chief Justice of Barbados; former Chairman, Commonwealth Caribbean Council of Legal Education; former Chairman, Inter-American Juridical Committee; former Judge of the High Court of Jamaica;

Ms. Robyn A. LAYTON, Q.C. (Australia), Chairperson of the Australian Health Ethics Committee of the National Health and Medical Research Council; former Honorary Solicitor for the South Australian Council for Civil Liberties; former Solicitor for the Central Aboriginal Land Council; former Chairman of the South Australian Sex Discrimination Board; former Judge and Deputy President of the South Australian Industrial Court and Commission; former Deputy President of the Federal Administrative Appeals Tribunal; Barrister-at-Law;

Mrs. Ewa LETOWSKA (Poland), Professor of Civil Law (Institute of Legal Studies of the Polish Academy of Sciences); former parliamentary ombudsman; former member of the Legislative Council to the Council of Ministers; former member of the Commission for the Reform of Civil Law; member of the Helsinki Committee;

Mr. Roman Zinovievich LIVSHITZ (Russian Federation), Doctor of Law; Principal Researcher at the Institute of State and Law of the Academy of Sciences of the Russian Federation; Professor of Labour Law and Jurisprudence at the Moscow International (Russian-American) University; member of the Scientific Advisory Council at the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation;

Bernd Baron von MAYDELL (Germany), Professor of Civil Law, Labour Law and Social Security Law; Director of the Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Social Law (Munich); Vice-President of the European Institute for Social Security (Leuven); Treasurer of the International Society of Labour Law and Social Security;

Mr. Kéba MBAYE (Senegal), Former Vice-President of the International Court of Justice; First Honorary President of the Supreme Court of Senegal; former President of the Constitutional Council of Senegal; member of the Institute of International Law; member of the Curatorium of the Academy of International Law; former President of the International Commission of Jurists; former President of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights; Deputy President of the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce; member of the Royal Academy of Overseas Science of Belgium and of the Academy of Politics and Ethics of France;

Mr. Cassio MESQUITA BARROS (Brazil), Independent lawyer specializing in labour relations (Sao Paulo); Titular Professor of Labour Law at the Law School of the public University of Sao Paolo and the Law School of the private Pontifical Catholic University of Sao Paulo; member of the Federal Council for Education: Academic Adviser, San Martin de Porres University (Lima); winner of the medal for "Honra ao Merito de Trabalho" awarded by Decree of the President of the Republic for a major contribution to the development of labour law; winner of the medal for "Honra ao Merito Judiciario do Trabalho" awarded by the Higher Labour Tribunal for his important contribution to the administration of justice; Honorary President of the "Asociación Iberoamericana de Derecho del Trabajo y Seguridad Social" (Buenos Aires, Argentina); Honorary President of the "Academia Nacional do Direito do Trabalho" (Rio de Janeiro) (composed of Brazilian experts in labour law); member of the International Academy of Jurisprudence and Comparative Law (Rio de Janeiro) and the International Academy of Law and Economy (Sao Paulo);

Mr. Benjamin Obi NWABUEZE (Nigeria), LLD (London); Hon. LLD (University of Nigeria); Senior Advocate of Nigeria; 1980 Laureate of the Nigerian National Merit Award; former Professor of Law at the University of Nigeria; former Professor and Dean of the Faculty of Law at the University of Zambia; former member, Governing Council, Nigerian Institute of International Affairs and Fellow of the Institute; former member, Governing Council, Nigerian Institute of Advanced Legal Studies; member, Council of Legal Education; former Minister of Education for Nigeria; Constitutional Adviser to the Government of Kenya (1992), Ethiopia (1992) and Zambia (1993);

Mr. Edilbert RAZAFINDRALAMBO (Madagascar), Honorary First President of the Supreme Court of Madagascar; former President of the High Court of Justice; former Professor of Law at the University of Madagascar; former Arbitrator of the ICSID and of the International Civil Aviation Organization; judge of the Administrative Tribunal of the ILO; former member of the International Council for Commercial Arbitration; former member of the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce; Alternate Chairman of the Staff Committee of Appeals, African Development Bank; member of the United Nations International Law Commission;

Mr. José María RUDA (Argentina), Former President of the International Court of Justice; former President of the United States-Iran Claims Tribunal; member of the Institute of International Law; former representative of Argentina to the United Nations; former Under-Secretary of Foreign Affairs; former member and President of the United Nations International Law Commission; member of the Permanent Court of Arbitration;

Mr. Boon Chiang TAN (Singapore), BBM, PPA, LLB, (London) Dip. Arts, Barrister-at-Law and Solicitor, Singapore; former President of the Industrial Arbitration Court of Singapore; former member of the Court and Council of the University of Singapore; former President, Copyright Tribunal; former Chairman, Income Tax Board of Review; Valuation Review Board; Hotels Licensing Board; Tenants' Compensation Board; former Vice-President (Asia) of the International Society of Labour Law and Social Security;

Mr. Fernando URIBE RESTREPO (Colombia), Barrister-at-law; former member of the Supreme Court of Justice of Colombia; former President of the Court of Justice of the Cartagena Accord; former President of the Supreme Court of Colombia; former Professor of International Labour Law at the National University of Colombia; former Professor of Labour Law, Universities Externado de Colombia and Pontificia Javeriana; former Professor of Philosophy of Law at the Bolivarian University of Medellín;

Mr. Jean Maurice VERDIER (France), Professor of Labour Law at the University of Paris X; Honorary President of the University of Paris X; Honorary Dean of the Faculty of Law and Economics; Director of the Institute for Research on Undertakings and Industrial Relations of the University of Paris X (associate of the National Centre for Scientific Research); former Director of the Institute of Labour Social Sciences, University of Paris I; Vice-President of Libre Justice, the French section of the International Commission of Jurists; former Professor at the Faculties of Law and Economics at Tunis (1956-61) and Algiers (1965-68); former President and Honorary President of the International Society of Labour Law and Social Security; former President and Honorary President of the French Association of Labour and Social Security Law;

Mr. Budislav VUKAS (Croatia), Professor of Public International Law at the University of Zagreb, Faculty of Law; associate member of the Institute of International Law; member of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) Dispute Settlement Mechanism; member of the Working Group on National Minorities of the Central European Initiative; member of the International Council of Environmental Law; member of the Commission on Environmental Law of the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources; former member of the Permanent Court of Arbitration;

Sir John WOOD (United Kingdom), CBE, LLM; Barrister; Chairman of the Central Arbitration Committee;

Mr. Toshio YAMAGUCHI (Japan), Honorary Professor of Law at the University of Tokyo, Professor of Law at Kanagawa University; member of the Japanese Central Committee of Labour Relations; former member of the Executive Committee of the International Society of Labour Law and Social Security; full member of the International Academy of Comparative Law.

5. The Committee elected Mr. J.M. RUDA as Chairman and Mr. E. RAZAFINDRALAMBO as Reporter of the Committee.

6. In pursuance of its terms of reference, as revised by the Governing Body at its 103rd (Geneva, 1947) Session, the Committee was called upon to examine:

(i) the annual reports under article 22 of the Constitution on the measures taken by Members to give effect to the provisions of the Conventions to which they are parties, and the information furnished by Members concerning the results of inspection;

(ii) the information and reports concerning Conventions and Recommendations, communicated by Members in accordance with article 19 of the Constitution;

(iii) the information and reports on measures taken by Members in accordance with article 35 of the Constitution.

7. The Committee, after an examination and evaluation of the above-mentioned reports and information, drew up its present report, consisting essentially of the following three parts: Part One is the General Report in which the Committee reviews general questions concerning international labour standards and related instruments and their implementation. Part Two contains observations concerning particular countries on the application of ratified Conventions (see section I and paragraphs 113 to 144 below), on the application of Conventions in non-metropolitan territories (see section II and paragraphs 113 to 144 below), and on the obligation to submit instruments to the competent authorities (see section III and paragraphs 145 to 155 below). Part Three, which is published in a separate volume (Report III (Part 4B)) reviews the reports supplied by governments under article 19 of the Constitution on the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98) (see paragraphs 156 to 160 below).

8. In carrying out its task, which consists of indicating the extent to which the situation in each State appears to be in conformity with the Conventions and the obligations undertaken by that State by virtue of the ILO Constitution, the Committee has followed the principles of independence, objectivity and impartiality set forth in its previous reports. It has continued to apply the working methods recalled in its 1987 report. The spirit of mutual respect, cooperation and responsibility has consistently prevailed in the Committee's relations with the International Labour Conference and its Committee on the Application of Standards, whose proceedings the Committee takes fully into consideration, not only in respect of general matters concerning standard-setting activities and supervisory procedures, but also in respect of specific matters concerning the way in which States fulfil their standard-setting obligations.

9. In this context, the Committee noted the attendance of the Chairman of its 63rd Session as an observer at the general discussion of the Committee on the Application of Standards of the 80th Session of the International Labour Conference (June 1993). It noted the decision of the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards to request the Director-General to invite the Chairman of the 64th Session of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations to attend once again as an observer the general discussion of the Committee on the Application of Standards of the 81st Session of the International Labour Conference (June 1994). The Committee welcomed the invitation.

II. SEVENTY-FIFTH ANNIVERSARY OF THE ILO

THE

Standard

1. Introduction

10. The 75th anniversary of the founding of the ILO will generate a wide-ranging discussion of the Organization's activities. The Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations wishes to associate itself with the commemoration of the anniversary and to participate in the process of reflection afforded by this occasion. In this regard, the Committee has paid attention mainly to the possibilities of improving the application of international labour standards. In accordance with its mandate and in the broader interests of the activities of the ILO, the Committee has put forward, for examination, some suggestions on this matter.

11. As the Preamble of the ILO Constitution proclaims, universal and lasting peace can be established only if it is based on social justice. This principle, which is affirmed in the Declaration of Philadelphia, has always guided the action of the ILO. This same principle should be the basis for the policies of all member States, in conformity with the notion that "the failure of any nation to adopt humane conditions of labour is an obstacle in the way of other nations which desire to improve the conditions in their own countries". (Endnote 1)

12. The ILO was founded in 1919, chiefly for the purpose of framing international legislation in the social field. That objective was confirmed in 1944. Existing international labour Conventions and Recommendations cover virtually all aspects of labour law and social security law.

13. In ILO philosophy and practice, there can be no development of international labour law without effective supervision of its application. This explains why supervision of the application of standards is ranked among the most important of the ILO's activities. ILO procedures and supervisory bodies have played a pioneering role on the international scene and still serve as a point of reference for other international organizations.

14. The framing of standards and the supervision of their application are part of the essential activities of the ILO. Suffice to recall that the number of ratifications of international labour Conventions now stands at over 6,000. In the majority of cases, States observe the obligations contained in ratified Conventions. Moreover, over the last 30 years the supervisory bodies have registered more than 2,000 cases of progress - in other words, instances of national legislation and practice being changed to meet the requirements of a ratified Convention, following comments by the supervisory bodies.

15. There have been radical changes on the international scene in recent years - the end of the Cold War, a revival of ethnic and national conflicts, growing structural unemployment in the most developed countries and structural adjustment programmes in a certain number of countries including developing countries are but a few examples. The ILO's standard-setting activities must keep pace with these changes so that the Organization can meet the challenges of the twenty-first century dynamically and effectively. The paragraphs that follow contain a brief description of the present situation and some food for thought on the future of standard-setting activities.

2. Framing and content of international labour standards

2.1 The present situation

16. The term "international labour standards" commonly refers to the international legal instruments drawn up by the International Labour Organization, in other words, the Conventions and Recommendations. The purpose of the Conventions is to establish substantive legal obligations for the member States of the ILO which ratify them. Ratification of international labour Conventions is a matter for free decision by each State; it carries with it the legal obligation to apply ratified Conventions through domestic law, and to submit to supervision by the appropriate ILO bodies, in accordance with established procedures, in order to ensure the application of the obligations undertaken. Recommendations, which often complement Conventions, on the other hand, are guidelines for national legislation and practice. They are not subject to ratification and cannot give rise to substantive legal obligations.

17. The International Labour Conference, as the legislative body of the ILO, adopts Conventions and Recommendations. Selected subjects are placed on the agenda of the Conference by decision either of the Governing Body of the International Labour Office (article 14, paragraph 1, of the Constitution) or of the Conference itself (article 16, paragraph 3). The decisions of the Governing Body are based on studies prepared by the Office, a technical committee or experts. The technical preparation that precedes and accompanies the framing of ILO standards is the best possible guarantee that an international instrument will only be adopted once its subject-matter has reached a sufficient degree of maturity. By the time they come into being, ILO standards have already achieved a high degree of consensus, partly because they need a two-thirds majority to be adopted by the Conference, and also because government, employers' and workers' delegates participate actively in the work. The preparatory work is published for governments, employers and workers to consult, so that they can form an opinion about the bearing of the provisions.

2.2 Prospects

18. Since 1919, 174 Conventions and 181 Recommendations have been adopted by the International Labour Conference. A question which sometimes arises is whether the ILO has not exhausted its role as legislator and should perhaps suspend or abandon it. The question has become more pressing, particularly with the increase in structural adjustment programmes and growing tendency to deregulate the labour market. In recent years, however, inequalities between States and within States have not only persisted but have very often widened. That is why, in order to maintain the cohesion of the international community as well as that within States, it is necessary to use instruments of universal character aiming at the promotion of social justice, namely the standards adopted by the ILO. In this regard, it should be stressed that if the framing of standards had been suspended in recent years, there would not have been a number of important instruments such as the ones on vocational rehabilitation and employment (1983), occupational health services (1985), seafarers' social security (1987), indigenous and tribal peoples (1989), protection of workers' claims in the event of the insolvency of their employer (1992) and the prevention of major industrial accidents (1993). In the view of the present Committee, to suspend the framing of new standards would be to deprive the ILO of one of its most effective means of maintaining the pace of progress and social dialogue.

19. For some years the ILO has also focused its efforts on reviewing and updating standards which are no longer suited to reality. These efforts should be pursued. In addition, consideration should be given to revising a number of recent Conventions that have not been ratified, despite their relevance, because certain provisions are considered too inflexible and certain requirements too demanding. The general surveys produced by the Committee of Experts could be a useful reference for revising and updating standards.

20. It must be remembered that ILO instruments, whether new or revised, set minimum standards (article 19, paragraph 8, of the Constitution). As a matter of principle, Conventions should set a general framework. The desire for flexibility in the framing of international labour Conventions has been reflected in the Constitution since 1919, and has prompted many of the flexibility clauses to be found in Conventions (for example the possibility of opting for one or several parts of a Convention or of choosing between different techniques of protection and application). Wherever possible such clauses should be included in new instruments and others drawn up, as required. In addition, more detailed provisions can be included in Recommendations accompanying Conventions.

21. Implementation of certain ILO standards can have direct repercussions on national economic policy as well as on individual enterprises. This is true, for example, of standards on social security or paid leave. In framing such standards, it is important to bear in mind their economic impact so that cost does not become a disincentive to ratification. This does not apply to standards on fundamental human rights which must be observed regardless of economic circumstances or fluctuations.

22. Certain provisions of Conventions and Recommendations adopted recently have been criticized in some quarters for their lack of clarity and coherence. This cannot but affect ratification, and in any event gives rise to problems when it comes to application. While the Conference is the legislative body of the Organization, the Office is without doubt partly responsible for this state of affairs, although it may only make proposals. It would be helpful if members of the standard-setting technical committees of the Conference showed awareness of the demands of their legislative work by ensuring that the texts that are finally adopted are as coherent and clear as possible.

23. The gestation period for a Convention or Recommendation is rarely less than five years from the time when the subject is chosen. The advantage of this long gestation period is that by the time the standards are adopted they have achieved a high degree of maturation and international consensus. The disadvantage is that the ILO's legislative procedure cannot always cope with new situations which might call for rapid intervention. So, consideration should be given to using more flexible formulas such as resolutions or codes of conduct, even if it means resuming the regular procedure later.

3. Supervision of the application of standards

3.1 The present situation

24. From the beginning, the ILO Constitution established that there should be regular monitoring of the application of ratified Conventions by means of an annual report from governments (article 22 of the Constitution). It also provided for ad hoc supervision in the event of representations (articles 24 and 25) or complaints (articles 26-29, and 31-34) being submitted to the Office. In addition, it established a procedure for supervising non-ratified Conventions and Recommendations (article 19, paragraphs 5(e) and 6(d)).

25. The ILO's regular supervision procedures have been of decisive importance. The capacity to keep pace with a constantly changing environment is one of the features of the supervisory machinery. International labour Conventions have been adopted since the First Session of the International Labour Conference in 1919. Within a few years the growing number of ratifications increased the flow of annual reports. It became clear that the plenary of the Conference could no longer cope with all the reports itself. As the number of reports grew it would eventually have had to spend all its time on them to the detriment of the framing of standards and its other tasks. Besides, the legal problems raised by the application of Conventions were becoming more complex, so a technical supervisory body was needed which could examine the reports from a legal standpoint and remain uninfluenced by group interests - which would inevitably have surfaced in the Conference because of its tripartite composition. This was how the first change came about in the supervisory machinery: by a resolution adopted in 1926 the Conference decided to set up a Committee on the Application of the Conventions and Recommendations of the Conference (hereafter referred to as the Conference Committee on Standards) and a Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations. The members of the latter are appointed not by governments, but by the Governing Body on the Director-General's proposal, and it is responsible, with technical support from the International Labour Standards Department, for examining, from a legal standpoint, governments' reports and any observations made by employers' and workers' organizations. The Committee of Experts' most important comments, called "observations", are published and submitted to the Conference, which transmits them to its Committee on the Application of Standards. They are examined by that Committee with the participation of the governments concerned and of delegates from national organizations of employers and workers.

26. As the years went by it became the practice, considered by some as a tradition not to be tampered with, for the Committee on the Application of Standards to deal only with cases already examined by the Committee of Experts. The Conference Committee has never operated as a review or appeals body vis-à-vis the Committee of Experts. The two bodies have different functions: the Committee of Experts is responsible for technical supervision, whereas the Conference Committee, which is tripartite, provides an opportunity for direct dialogue between governments, employers and workers, and can even mobilize international public opinion.

27. Neither of the supervisory bodies may impose sanctions of any kind, though their conclusions are sometimes regarded as political or moral sanctions. The two supervisory bodies complement each other effectively: the Committee of Experts conducts a technical and impartial examination of the cases and the Conference Committee - whose conclusions are submitted to the plenary sitting of the Conference - contributes the political weight and influence of an international forum in which governments, employers and workers may speak freely.

28. Besides the regular supervisory procedure, based on the examination of governments' reports, the ILO Constitution provides for two other procedures. Under the representation procedure, an employers' or workers' organization may submit allegations of failure by a Member of the Organization to adopt satisfactory measures, within its legal system, for the application of a Convention to which it is a party. If the representation meets the formal requirements of receivability, (Endnote 2) it is sent to the government concerned and the case is submitted for examination by a tripartite committee set up for the purpose within the Governing Body, whose conclusions and recommendations may be published.

29. The complaints procedure is more elaborate than the representation procedure in terms of the rules of the Constitution that govern it. Under this procedure any member State of the ILO may file a complaint to the Office against another Member which, in its opinion, has not adopted the necessary measures to give proper effect to a Convention ratified by both Members. This procedure provides all the guarantees of a regular procedure. It should be pointed out that the complaints procedure may also be initiated by the Governing Body of its own motion, or by a delegate to the Conference.

30. Complaints are referred to commissions of inquiry appointed specifically for each case and composed of independent persons of international repute. The conclusions and recommendations of the commissions are published in the ILO Official Bulletin and may be challenged before the International Court of Justice whose ruling is final. If a Member fails within the prescribed time-limit to give effect to the recommendations of the commission of inquiry or the decision of the International Court of Justice, the Governing Body may recommend to the Conference any measures it deems necessary to ensure that the recommendations are observed. The government against which the complaint is filed may at any time inform the Governing Body that it has taken the necessary measures to implement the recommendations of the commission of inquiry or the Court's decision. In practice, no economic or other sanctions have been applied in the context of this procedure.

31. The procedure laid down in article 19(5)(e) and (6)(d) of the Constitution is not a supervisory one in the strict sense, since it is concerned with the action taken by member States in respect of unratified Conventions and of Recommendations. In practice, however, the General Surveys made each year under article 19 by the Committee of Experts on instruments selected by the Governing Body contain an analysis of domestic laws and comments by the Committee of Experts on their consistency with the instruments in question. These surveys have continued to grow in importance. Today they serve as a reference for the whole standards supervision system.

32. The above procedures were laid down in the Constitution in 1919. Since the Second World War, two other supervisory procedures have been introduced, one for freedom of association and the other for equal treatment. These procedures are based on the universal values and principles set forth in the preamble to the Constitution and in the Philadelphia Declaration (incorporated in the Constitution).

33. The special procedure for complaints concerning freedom of association was established in 1950 by an agreement between the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) and the ILO. The most original feature of this procedure is the fact that the receivability of a complaint is not necessarily linked to the ratification of the relevant Conventions by the State in question, but rests on the fundamental principles deriving from the Constitution. One of the supervisory bodies which intervene in this procedure is the Fact-Finding and Conciliation Commission on Freedom of Association, a standing commission set up by the Governing Body along the lines of the commission of inquiry provided for in article 26 of the Constitution. A tripartite committee (Committee on Freedom of Association) was also set up within the Governing Body initially for the purpose of determining which complaints should be submitted to the Fact-Finding and Conciliation Commission. The latter was to have been the centre of gravity of the procedure. But events ruled otherwise. Under the new procedure the government against which the complaint was lodged was to give its consent for the case to be submitted to the Commission. However, as States were reluctant to give their consent, the scope of action of the Committee on Freedom of Association gradually broadened, particularly in cases where an urgent decision was needed. Today, the Committee is undeniably the real centre of gravity of this special procedure.

34. A procedure for equal treatment issues was established in 1973. It enables the Director-General to undertake special studies on issues of discrimination in employment on grounds of race, religion, national extraction, social origin, membership of a minority, or sex. The government brought to task has to give its prior consent. This special procedure has never been used.

35. Although it is not strictly speaking a supervisory procedure, mention should also be made of the direct contacts procedure officially inaugurated in 1968, on the basis of a series of principles established by the Committee of Experts and approved by the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards. (Endnote 3) Its purpose is to enable a representative of the Director-General to examine with the government concerned how to overcome any difficulties in applying a ratified Convention or observing constitutional obligations regarding standards, or any obstacles in the way of ratification. The government must make a request for direct contacts. In the case of ratified Conventions, the information gathered by the Director-General's representative is sent to the Committee of Experts. This procedure is frequently used; it has enabled serious discrepancies noted by the supervisory bodies to be overcome. Direct contacts have also been used frequently and successfully in the context of the freedom of association procedure. In this context, such direct contracts could bring about further development, especially if governments concerned adopt a more open attitude.

3.2 Prospects

36. The ILO's supervisory system has earned wide international recognition for its efficiency, but it could be further improved. A general question which arises in this context is whether the present supervisory machinery should not be opened up to individuals, which is not now the case. If individuals had access to redress on matters concerning ratified Conventions or fundamental principles whose content lends itself to such a procedure (for example, freedom of association, equal treatment or freedom of work), the field of action of the ILO's supervisory system would certainly be broadened. Before such a decision were taken, however, an assessment would have to be made of the human and financial resources needed to deal with such cases properly, taking account, in particular, of the universal nature of the ILO and the potential for conflicts in the social sector. As things now stand, it seems that opening up the system to individuals cannot be envisaged; besides, they can transmit their comments on the application of ratified Conventions through organizations of employers and workers, which are entitled to present their observations for the consideration of the supervisory bodies.

37. Another question which is being asked with increasing frequency is what compensation could be envisaged for persons or bodies adversely affected by the failure to apply Conventions or the principles laid down in the ILO Constitution. Some of the supervisory bodies, particularly the Committee on Freedom of Association, have already recommended such compensation. It is a matter that requires further discussion.

38. Generally speaking, it can be said that the regular supervisory procedure, based on article 22 of the Constitution, has on the whole given satisfaction and that it should continue to be at the core of the ILO's system of supervision. But certain adjustments have been necessary: the growing number of ratifications, in itself a clear sign that member States approve of the ILO's standard-setting activities, has led to a state of saturation both in the supervisory bodies and in the national administrations responsible for preparing reports. The Governing Body adopted proposals on this issue at its November 1993 Session. (Endnote 4) It also decided to bring forward the date of the Committee of Experts' annual meeting to December which, amongst other things, will enable the Committee's report to be published earlier. These adjustments will take effect in 1995 and should make the procedure more efficient at no extra cost.

39. The division of functions between the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee on Standards has been one of the keys to the success of the ILO's supervisory system in that the complementary nature of the independent examination carried out by the Committee of Experts and the tripartite examination of the Conference Committee on Standards makes it possible to maintain a desirable balance in the treatment of cases. In the present Committee's view, communication and dialogue between the two committees should be improved. With this in mind, the Conference Committee on Standards invited the Chairman of the Committee of Experts to attend its general discussion as an observer in June 1993. The initiative proved to be most satisfactory and the invitation has been renewed for 1994. This is an important step towards improving the dialogue between the two supervisory bodies.

40. The constitutional representation and complaint procedures have, on the whole, been satisfactory. But, bearing in mind that procedures of commissions of inquiry in some cases lack flexibility, it may be necessary to give consideration to other procedures less expensive and more flexible.

41. The success of the procedure for complaints to the Committee on Freedom of Association of the Governing Body contrasts with what has to be called the failure of the procedure of special studies on equal treatment. It could be that the success of the former is largely due to the tripartite nature of that Committee, the competence of its members, its relatively stable membership and the regularity of its meetings (three times a year). In addition, it is flexible and expeditious and costs relatively little. The Committee on Freedom of Association has succeeded in reconciling dynamism and efficiency while maintaining the guarantees of a regular procedure. However, discrimination in employment, which is becoming increasingly topical owing to growing discrimination on grounds of sex and ethnic origin, still lacks special protection of the kind that exists for freedom of association. The same could be said of forced labour. According to the present Committee, one might envisage setting up a procedure which would deal more effectively with cases of discrimination, forced labour and child labour.

42. Because of their nature, the existing supervisory procedures do have the disadvantage that they are not always able to respond with the speed and flexibility needed to overcome serious discrepancies in the application of ratified Conventions, with the one notable exception of direct contacts. Other mechanisms such as permanent access to mediation and voluntary arbitration proposed by the Director-General in his Report to the Conference, (Endnote 5) could be envisaged to complete the panoply of ILO procedures. If such mechanisms were introduced, it would be necessary to ensure that the coherence and unity of the supervisory system were preserved in all cases and, in particular, that the new mechanisms dovetailed with existing procedures.

4. More active participation in the supervisory system

4.1 The participation of national administrations

43. At government level, supervision of the application of standards should not be an exercise between only one ministry and the supervisory bodies and their secretariat. The preparation of the reports required under article 22 of the Constitution very often involves several services or even several ministerial departments. The obligation to report should not be regarded as a merely formal obligation, but more as a means for governments to take stock periodically of the state of their labour legislation using instruments that they have ratified voluntarily as a gauge. The recent adjustments in the reporting procedure (Endnote 6) could be an opportunity for member States to consider anew the scope of this international obligation and its usefulness for the country.

44. The preparation of reports increasingly requires close cooperation between the various government bodies not only because the instruments adopted are becoming more technical but also because responsibility for their implementation is shared more widely. Clear and well-documented reports are a major prerequisite for constructive dialogue with the supervisory bodies. The main responsibility in the supervision lies with governments. It is also governments that have to decide what is to be done with the information collected for preparing the reports required under articles 19, 22 and 35 of the Constitution or, more generally, how to invest the time and work that goes into preparing the reports.

45. In this regard, the Committee would give a few examples of how the information collected in preparation for reports can be put to broader use. In certain cases, it has been considered useful to send the report to the parliamentary committee responsible for social issues, particularly when the application of a Convention raises legislative problems. In other cases, inter-ministerial bodies have been set up to prepare the reports, either on a permanent basis, or on an ad hoc basis if the supervisory bodies have noted serious difficulties. Standard-setting would benefit if all those responsible at national level were more closely involved in the supervision process. Broadening the use made of the information has a dual purpose: to improve the application of international labour standards, particularly ratified Conventions, by those responsible at national level, and to improve standard-setting activities, particularly the process for reviewing international labour standards, by obtaining a broader range of opinions on their relevance or the conditions for their application.

4.2 The participation of employers' and workers' organizations

46. The need for more participants at the report preparation stage in the dialogue on the application of standards led the Governing Body in 1932 to decide, on the proposal of the supervisory bodies, that the report forms on ratified Conventions should ask whether the government concerned had received comments from employers' and workers' organizations. (Endnote 7) The question covers all employers' and workers' organizations concerned: national central confederations, branch federations, regional or local organizations, enterprise unions, and international employers' and workers' organizations (confederations or occupational federations).

47. In addition to the right to comment on the application of ratified Conventions, certain organizations were given the right, as of 1948, to receive a copy of the report submitted by the government under article 23(2) of the Constitution which states: "Each Member shall communicate to the representative organizations recognized for the purpose of article 3 copies of the information and reports communicated to the Director-General in pursuance of articles 19 and 22."

48. The Committee has examined in detail the arrangements for the participation of employers' and workers' organizations and made proposals to improve them. (Endnote 8) The adjustments made to the procedure by the Governing Body at its 258th Session (November 1993) will mean greater involvement of employers' and workers' organizations; this, in turn, will require an additional effort on the part of the Office to assist those organizations in understanding ILO standards (particularly the conditions for their application in law and practice) and procedures. Such an effort would round off the activities to strengthen employers' and workers' organizations, or even contribute to establishing them where they do not yet exist. Priority should be given to measures to broaden their autonomy and make them more representative.

49. The Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144), is an appropriate instrument for involving employers' and workers' organizations more closely in standard-setting activities. The present Committee believes that promoting ratification of this instrument should be a priority of the International Labour Office.

50. Progress in the organization of consultations, beginning with discussions at the national level, could help solve a number of problems encountered in applying standards. Successful consultations of this kind would avoid referral of such problems to an international body before an attempt has been made to solve them internally. In its last examination of this matter, the Committee none the less recalled that consultation does not necessarily mean agreement and that, in certain cases, despite consultations, divergencies have persisted and comments have been sent to the appropriate international bodies.

51. Cooperation seems to be emerging between organizations of employers and workers and non-governmental international organizations dealing with the protection and promotion of human rights; the former sometimes communicate through the Director-General information they have received from the latter concerning the application of Conventions in the context of the procedures referred to above. So there could well be new developments in the participation of non-governmental international organizations other than employers' and workers' in supervisory activities. There is already participation of this kind in the context of the procedure in article 26 of the Constitution; the commissions of inquiry ask non-governmental organizations to pass on any available relevant information.

5. Promotion of standards and technical cooperation

52. In the past few years the Committee has been following with great interest the different steps being taken to ensure complementarity between standard-setting activities and technical cooperation. Some of the proposals on the subject have been examined by the Governing Body (Endnote 9) and the Conference itself in the general discussion on technical cooperation. (Endnote 10) Although most of the questions raised on those occasions are outside the Committee's terms of reference, it none the less intends to lend its support to any measures taken in the context of technical cooperation to improve the application of international labour standards.

53. In the present Committee's view, technical assistance and promotion of ILO standards should continue to receive the greatest possible attention in the future. This is an area where much remains to be done. However, if emphasis is placed on these activities - which in practical terms means devoting greater financial and human resources to them - it should on no account be to the detriment of the efficiency of the supervisory system, which must remain high on the list of priorities.

54. In contributing to the discussion on developments in international labour standards and particularly developments in the supervisory system and its future, the intent of the Committee was to provide a recapitulation of the present as a starting point from which to advance successfully towards the future. What matters is not so much to take stock of the past but to prepare for the future in a world which sometimes tends to forget that without freedom, democracy and social justice mankind is almost certainly doomed. Human beings must be returned to the core of the ethical, political, economic and social concerns of the international community, which should take account of the situations of the poorest and most vulnerable. The International Labour Organization still has an immense task to accomplish. It is to be hoped that the foregoing reflections will help it to remain faithful to the ideals that witnessed its birth and execute even more effectively the social mandate conferred on it by the international community. The Committee, for its part intends, within the framework of the mandate assigned to it, to pursue its action in the light of the Philadelphia Declaration to ensure that all human beings, regardless of their race, creed or sex, have the right to pursue both their material well-being and their spiritual development in conditions of freedom and dignity, of economic security and equal opportunity.

III. GENERAL

Membership of the Organization

55. Since the Committee's last session the number of member States of the ILO has risen from 162 to 170. The following countries became Members of the Organization: The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (28 May 1993), Kazakhstan (31 May 1993), Bosnia and Herzegovina (2 June 1993), Eritrea (7 June 1993), Georgia (22 June 1993), Turkmenistan (24 September 1993), Tajikistan (26 November 1993) and Oman (31 January 1994).

New standards adopted by the Conference in 1993 and the coming into force of Conventions

56. The Committee notes that at its 80th Session (June 1993), the International Labour Conference adopted the Prevention of Major Industrial Accidents Convention (No. 174) and Recommendation (No. 181), 1993.

57. The Working Conditions (Hotels and Restaurants) Convention, 1991 (No. 172), has been ratified by Mexico and Spain and will come into force on 7 July 1994.

Ratifications and denunciations

58. In 1993, 398 ratifications by 38 member States were registered. The total number of ratifications at 31 December 1993 was 6,050. Between the beginning of 1994 and 25 February 1994, 19 ratifications by 8 member States have been registered.

59. The total number of denunciations not accompanied by the ratification of a revised Convention was 72 at 25 February 1994.

60. Since the Committee's last session, the Director-General has registered five denunciations accompanied by the ratification of a revised Convention.

Constitutional and other procedures

61. The Committee was informed of the following decisions taken by the Governing Body in cases involving recourse to the constitutional procedures of complaint and representation and other procedures.

A. Complaints submitted under article 26 of the ILO Constitution

Complaint against Sweden

62. Consultations are being pursued concerning the complaint submitted by the Employers' delegate of Sweden to the 78th (1991) Session of the International Labour Conference alleging non-observance by Sweden of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize Convention, 1948 (No. 87), the Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), and the Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 147). On 11 February 1993, the Government appointed an investigator to explore and analyse the problems surrounding the question. At its 258th (November 1993) Session, the Governing Body took note of the Government's information concerning consultations entered into and measures taken in relation to the complaint. It decided to await further information from the Government on the results of that investigation before deciding on any course of action. The final report of the investigator has now been communicated and is in the process of being translated.

Complaint against Côte d'Ivoire

63. At its 256th (May 1993) Session, the Governing Body approved the interim report of the Committee on Freedom of Association relating to the complaint presented by the Workers' delegates to the 79th (1992) Session of the International Labour Conference alleging non-observance by Côte d'Ivoire of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize Convention, 1948 (No. 87). In November 1993, the Committee on Freedom of Association and the Governing Body requested the Government to accept a direct contacts mission.

B. Representations submitted under article 24 of the ILO Constitution

Representation concerning the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

64. The Committee noted previously that the Committee established to examine the representation submitted by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) alleging non-observance by the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia of the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111), submitted its report to the 253rd (May-June 1992) Session of the Governing Body. The Governing Body noted that, while awaiting a decision by the United Nations, it was not possible to identify the Government concerned for the application of article 7 of the Standing Orders governing the procedure for the examination of representations submitted under articles 24 and 25 of the Constitution of the ILO. The Governing Body has still not set a date for the examination of the report.

Representation concerning Venezuela

65. In relation to the representation made by the International Organization of Employers (IOE) and the Venezuelan Federation of Chambers and Associations of Commerce and Production (FEDECAMARAS) alleging non-observance by Venezuela of international labour Conventions Nos. 4, 81, 87, 88, 95, 98, 100, 111, 143, 144 and 158, at its 256th (May 1993) Session, the Governing Body approved the report of the tripartite committee which was set up to examine the aspects concerning Conventions Nos. 4, 81, 88, 95, 100, 111, 143, 144 and 158. With regard to the aspects relating to Conventions Nos. 87 and 98, the Committee on Freedom of Association adopted interim conclusions and requested the Government to take measures with a view to modifying the provisions of the legislation.

Representation concerning Sweden

66. At its 258th (November 1993) Session, the Governing Body approved the report of the tripartite committee set up to examine the representation made on 28 January 1993 by the Swedish Trade Union Confederation (LO), the Swedish Confederation of Professional Employees (TCO) and the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), alleging non-observance by Sweden of the Employment Injury Benefits Convention, 1964 (No. 121). It declared the procedure closed.

Representation concerning Myanmar

67. At its 255th (March 1993) Session, the Governing Body decided that the representation made by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) alleging non-observance by Myanmar of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), was receivable and set up a tripartite committee to examine the representation.

Representation concerning Poland

68. At its 257th (June 1993) Session, the Governing Body decided that the representation made by the All-Poland Alliance of Trade Unions (OPZZ), alleging non-observance by Poland of the Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122), was receivable and set up a tripartite committee to examine the representation.

Representation concerning Brazil

69. At its 258th (November 1993) Session, the Governing Body decided that the representation made by the Latin American Centre of Workers (CLAT) alleging non-observance by Brazil of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), and the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105), was receivable and set up a tripartite committee to examine the representation.

C. Special procedures concerning freedom of association

70. At both of its last meetings (May and November 1993), the Committee on Freedom of Association had before it an average of 110 cases concerning nearly 50 countries from all parts of the world, in which it presented interim or final conclusions, or cases of which the examination has been adjourned pending the arrival of information from governments (287th to 291st Reports). Some of these cases have been before the Committee on two occasions. Moreover, since March 1993, 46 new cases have been submitted to the Committee. Direct contacts or advisory missions concerning cases pending before the Committee on Freedom of Association visited Colombia, El Salvador, Paraguay and Peru.

Functions in regard to other international and regional instruments

A. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

71. In accordance with the procedure approved by the Governing Body at its 236th (May 1987) Session, by a communication dated 10 November 1993, the International Labour Office conveyed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, for tranmission to the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, information concerning the situation in States whose reports were communicated to the Office by the United Nations, in accordance with Article 18 of the Covenant. Six of these reports concerned the implementation of Articles 6 to 9 of the Covenant, which deal with the right to work, the right to just and favourable conditions of work, freedom of association and the right to social security. Four reports concerned the implementation of Article 10 of the Covenant, which covers the protection of maternity, children and adolescents in the context of employment and work. Representatives of the International Labour Standards Department participated in the discussion of these reports by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

B. International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights

72. In conformity with the wish expressed by the Commission on Human Rights at its Eighth Session regarding the provision of information by specialized agencies, two communications dated 7 July and 27 September 1993 were sent by the International Labour Office to the Centre for Human Rights, for transmission to the Commission on Human Rights. The ILO reports concerned, respectively, five countries whose reports were due for the 48th (June 1993) Session, and six countries whose reports were due for the 49th (October-November 1993) Session of the Commission on Human Rights. All of the information submitted by the ILO to the 48th Session dealt with Articles 3 and 26 of the Covenant which cover equality between men and women and Article 8 which covers the prohibition of forced labour; and four of the reports also dealt with Articles 2 and 22 of the Covenant, which are concerned with the prohibition of discrimination and freedom of association, respectively. For the 49th Session, the ILO once again submitted information on Article 8 (four countries), Article 2 (three countries) and Articles 3, 26 and 22 (six countries). A representative of the International Labour Standards Department attended the 48th and 49th Sessions.

C. United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women

73. In accordance with Article 22 of this Convention, the ILO submitted to the Committee for the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, for examination at its 13th Session (January-February 1994), a report on the application of the Convention in the areas falling within the scope of the ILO's activities, covering 16 countries whose reports were due. With specific reference to the articles on the elimination of discrimination against women and the promotion of equal treatment, the ILO report contains additional information to that in the reports submitted by the States parties, as well as relevant comments of the ILO Committee of Experts on the Applications of Conventions and Recommendations and general information on the activities undertaken by the ILO to promote equality for women workers.

D. United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child

74. In accordance with Article 45 of this Convention, the ILO was represented at the Third, Fourth and Fifth Sessions of the Committee on the Rights of the Child (Geneva, January 1993, September-October 1993 and January 1994). At its Fourth (September-October 1993) Session, the Committee held a general discussion on the protection of children against economic exploitation (Article 32, paragraphs 1 and 2, of the Convention). At the request of the Committee, the Office prepared a document defining the concept of economic exploitation, to which the Convention refers. Work which is carried out in conditions of employment inferior to those established by international labour standards (minimum age for admission to employment, forced labour, protection against employment injury, protection of wages, etc.) should be considered to constitute economic exploitation and, as such, would require the adoption and implementation of protective measures by the State party to the Convention. The Committee on the Rights of the Child, in a declaration adopted following this general discussion, called upon States parties to the Convention on the Rights of the Child to ratify international labour Conventions on minimum age and conditions of work, and placed particular emphasis on inspection procedures at the workplace. The Committee on the Rights of the Child examined the question of its relations with the specialized agencies at its Fifth (January 1994) Session. As of December 1993, 153 States were party to the Convention.

E. United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination

75. In accordance with a decision of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, the ILO attended the 42nd (March 1993) and 43rd (August 1993) Sessions of that Committee. In pursuance of the arrangements for cooperation with the ILO, the most recent comments by the Committee of Experts on several countries, and particularly its comments concerning the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111), and the Indigenous and Tribal Populations Convention, 1957 (No. 107), were submitted to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination in the context of its examination of reports due.

F. European Code of Social Security and Protocol thereto

76. In accordance with the established supervisory procedure under article 74(4) of the Code and the arrangements made between the ILO and the Council of Europe, 15 reports on the European Code of Social Security and the Protocol thereto, submitted by the States which have ratified these instruments, were sent to the Office by the Secretary-General of the Council of Europe. After examining all these reports, the Committee was able to observe that the States parties to the Code and the Protocol continue to apply them in full or nearly in full. At the sitting in which the Committee examined the reports on the European Code of Social Security and the Protocol thereto, the Council of Europe was represented by Mr. S.G. Nagel, Head of the Social Security and Employment Division. The conclusions of the Committee regarding these reports will be sent to the Council of Europe.

77. In addition, a representative of the ILO took part, as technical adviser, in the meeting of the European Social Security Committee of the Council of Europe, held in Strasbourg (France) in November 1993. At that meeting, the European Social Security Committee endorsed, as in the past, the conclusions of the Committee of Experts.

78. The Committee of Experts was informed that the European Code of Social Security came into force for Cyprus on 16 April 1993.

G. European Social Charter and Additional Protocol

79. In the context of collaboration with the Council of Europe, a representative of the Office participated, in an advisory capacity, in accordance with article 26 of the European Social Charter, at several sessions held in 1993 of the Committee of Independent Experts set up to supervise the application of the Charter. Furthermore, a representative of the Office participated in the meetings of the Committee for the European Social Charter. The work of that Committee is intended to improve the supervisory procedures and contents of the Charter.

80. The Protocol to amend the Charter, which was adopted on 21 October 1991, has been ratified by Cyprus and the Netherlands.

81. The Committee welcomes the excellent collaboration between the International Labour Organization and the Council of Europe in the activities relating to the Social Charter.

Collaboration with other international organizations

A. Cooperation in the field of standards with the United Nations and specialized agencies

82. In the context of the collaboration established with other international organizations on questions concerning the supervision of the application of international instruments relating to subjects of common interest, copies of the reports received under article 22 of the Constitution were forwarded to the United Nations and other specialized agencies and intergovernmental organizations with which the ILO has entered into special arrangements for this purpose.

83. Thus, in accordance with established practice, copies of the reports received from governments on the Indigenous and Tribal Populations Convention, 1957 (No. 107), were forwarded for comment to the United Nations, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the World Health Organization (WHO); copies of these reports were also sent to the Inter-American Indian Institute of the Organization of American States. The WHO and the United Nations also received a copy of one report on the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169). Copies of reports on the Rural Workers' Organizations Convention, 1975 (No. 141), were communicated to the FAO and the United Nations. Copies of reports on the Human Resources Development Convention, 1975 (No. 142), were communicated to UNESCO. Copies of reports on the Migrant Workers (Supplementary Provisions) Convention, 1975 (No. 143), were forwarded to the WHO, UNESCO and the United Nations. Copies of the reports received on the Nursing Personnel Convention, 1977 (No. 149), were communicated to the WHO. Copies of reports on the Prevention of Accidents (Seafarers) Convention, 1970 (No. 134), and on the Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 147), were sent to the International Maritime Organization (IMO).

84. Representatives of these Organizations were also invited to attend the sittings of the Committee of Experts at which the Conventions in question were discussed.

B. Relations between the ILO and the European Union

85. In its previous report the Committee noted the advisory opinion given on 19 March 1993 by the Court of Justice of the European Communities concerning the Community's competence to "conclude" the Chemicals Convention, 1990 (No. 170). The Court found that the competence to "conclude" Convention No. 170 belongs at the same time to the Member States (of the Community) and to the Community itself. At its 256th Session (May 1993), the Governing Body conducted a preliminary examination of the scope of the advisory opinion, pending a later examination of its implications by the Community authorities themselves. The Conference Committee (June 1993) also discussed the relationship between the standard-setting activities of the ILO and the activities of the European Community (now the European Union) in the light of the Court's opinion. The Committee was informed, in this connection, that the European Commission has just submitted a proposal for a decision to the Council of the European Union with a view to determining the consequences of the opinion in terms of the exercise of the Community's external competence at International Labour Conferences, when competence belongs both to the Community as a whole and to its member States. Examination of this issue should therefore be resumed later within the ILO in the light of the proposed decision.

Matters relating to human rights

86. The Committee recalls that international labour standards embody the human rights that lie within the ILO's mandate. It is the Committee's practice to note developments in this area in its General Report.

87. The ILO took part in the World Conference on Human Rights held in Vienna from 14 to 25 June 1993 as well as in the four sessions of its preparatory committee. The Committee notes the Declaration and Plan of Action adopted by the Conference, calling for universal ratification of international human rights treaties. It noted with interest the recognition given to the decisive role that the specialized agencies have to play in the formulation, promotion and implementation of human rights. Particular attention is given to some of the issues of special concern to the ILO such as as child labour, trade union rights, the vulnerable situation of migrant workers, the rights of indigenous and tribal peoples and equality between the sexes. It will now be necessary to consider ways of implementing the Declaration, for which reports on progress will have to be prepared regularly. The Committee hopes that interaction between the United Nations human rights bodies and the specialized agencies will be strengthened as a result.

88. The Committee recalls that 1993 was proclaimed by the General Assembly of the United Nations as the International Year of the World's Indigenous People. It notes that the International Labour Office was named Co-coordinator of the International Year together with the United Nations Centre for Human Rights. Recalling the important role that the ILO has played in this area since its earliest days, the Committee notes that the ILO has increased its work on this subject during the International Year. For example, it has intensified its technical cooperation activities for the benefit of indigenous peoples in various regions of the world, and has taken steps to stimulate reflection among all parts of the United Nations system on the possibilities of coordinating their activities in this area. The ILO has co-sponsored two meetings for indigenous peoples and the United Nations specialized agencies.

Questions concerning the application of Conventions

Application of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29)

89. This year, the Committee examined many reports covering a broad range of concerns about the application of this Convention. The exploitation and resultant human misery still occurring in many member States in flagrant contravention of this Convention are a matter of the gravest concern. One aspect of significant disquiet to the Committee relates to forced child labour, and particularly the exploitation of children for prostitution and pornography. This form of child labour is increasingly advertised outside the country in which it occurs and is therefore the subject of deliberate and increased exploitation by tourists and visitors from other countries. No longer is such exploitation of children a responsibility only of the country in which it occurs, it is an international responsibility.

90. The Committee appeals to those member States which have not already taken action, to assist in the eradication of these deplorable practices by taking measures in their own territories, to prevent the involvement of persons within their borders, in particular by ensuring the punishment of those who advertise or promote such activities in another country or travel there for such activities. Such complementary measures would not of course absolve the member State in which such exploitation of children occurs from itself taking firm action to prevent such practices and to prosecute all persons involved.

Application of the Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122)

91. Upon conclusion of its examination of the application of the Convention during the period 1990-92 which it had undertaken at its previous session, the Committee wishes to add some remarks to those appearing in paragraphs 52 to 57 of its 1993 report. Information drawn from reports examined this year confirms, with the exception of rare cases of quasi-full employment, that the employment situation has deteriorated in a context of weak growth or recession, resulting in increased unemployment and more precarious employment. The consequences for individuals and the risks to social cohesion arising from the virtually universal growth of long-term unemployment are of particular concern. In addition, some countries have experienced growth in economic activity without improvement in the employment situation. This amounts to a new ground for concern, in that it could be a sign of long-term structural changes that are unfavourable for employment. There is little evidence that ways of tackling this have been determined, either regionally or in individual countries.

92. As the Committee noted last year, although most governments stated in their reports that they were carrying out policies directed towards favouring growth in production and in employment, they have most often adopted macroeconomic orientations tending, in the short term, to give priority to the control of inflation and public finance, even if at the price of a high level of unemployment. Furthermore, it is not unusual within the context of the transition towards a market economy or structural adjustment for programmes of privatization or employment reduction in the public sector to contribute directly to increased unemployment. The Committee, which will have the opportunity to return to the important question of dismissal for economic or structural reasons in the general survey that in February 1995 will be devoted to the 1982 instruments on termination of employment, notes with concern the growing divergence between the Convention, which provides for the formulation and application, "as a major goal", of an "active policy designed to promote full, productive and freely chosen employment", and national practices where renewed growth in employment is expected upon the re-establishment of macroeconomic balance or improved competitiveness to which priority has been given. Moreover, the goals of raising standards of living and promoting equity of employment policy should not be forgotten when, for example, the reduction of the minimum wage is envisaged to favour greater flexibility in the labour market.

93. In this respect, numerous reports supplying precise and detailed information on measures taken to combat unemployment through intervention in the labour market, particularly in the area of job placement and training, fail to indicate the manner in which these measures are integrated into the larger perspective of employment policy within the meaning of the Convention. The Committee is bound to recall, in its individual comments, that the objectives of the Convention should be pursued within "the framework of a coordinated economic and social policy". It is essential to ensure that the scope of the Convention is not reduced to only a labour market policy. The Committee has also had to recall in several cases the importance attached to giving full effect to the provisions of the Convention providing for consultation with representatives of employers and workers, as well as other sectors of the active population, such as persons employed in the rural and informal sectors. The pursuit of a social dialogue on employment policies that is as broad as possible is particularly important at a time of wide-ranging structural adjustment.

94. The Committee, which has also had the opportunity to emphasize the extent to which the protection of fundamental rights of workers depends on the implementation of a policy to promote the goal of full, productive and freely chosen employment, is pleased that the Governing Body, in the context of the adjustment of the regular supervisory procedures, reaffirmed the priority status of this Convention. In addition it notes the inclusion in the agenda of the 83rd (1996) Session of the Conference of a general discussion on employment policies in a global context. The thorough examination of the difficulties encountered in practice in the effective application of this Convention which, although adopted 30 years ago, provides essential principles whose current relevance is broadly recognized, will not fail to form a solid basis for the debate.

IV. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE IN THE FIELD OF

Standard

A. Direct contacts and cooperation in the field of standards

95. A direct contacts mission to examine problems raised in the previous comments of the Committee on the application of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), visited Thailand in August 1993. Direct contacts missions concerning the application of the Freedom of Association and the Protection of the Right to Organize Convention, 1948 (No. 87) and the Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), visited Costa Rica and Indonesia in October and November 1993 respectively and Pakistan in January 1994. A consultative mission concerning the application of Convention No. 98 took place in Malaysia in March and April 1993.

96. During the year, the regional advisers on standards have visited nearly 50 countries. Most of these visits were designed to assist governments in finding solutions to the various problems experienced in relation to international labour standards. The others concerned consultations on standards-related questions in the context of technical cooperation activities; the promotion of standards at the national, subregional and regional levels or among employers' and workers' organizations; and support for multidisciplinary missions on matters relating to standards. The following countries were visited: Africa: Benin, Burkina Faso, Côte d'Ivoire, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Lesotho, Mauritania, Namibia, South Africa, Tunisia, Zambia and Zimbabwe; Arab countries: Egypt, Syrian Arab Republic and Yemen; Latin America and the Caribbean: Antigua and Barbuda, Aruba, Bahamas, Bolvia, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Ecuador, Granada, Guyana, Honduras, Suriname and Trinidad and Tobago; Asia and the Pacific: Australia, Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Korea, Malaysia, Nepal, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Viet Nam; there was also a visit to Hong Kong. Missions were also undertaken in Central and Eastern European countries: Azerbaijan, Croatia, Estonia, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russian Federation, Slovakia, Ukraine and Uzbekistan.

97. In 1993, several inter-regional and subregional seminars and a symposium on international labour standards were held: an ILO/ALO Inter-Regional Seminar on International and Arab Labour Standards in Arab countries (February 1993, Syrian Arab Republic); Sub-Regional Workers' Education Seminars on International Labour Standards and Freedom of Association for the French and Portuguese-speaking African countries respectively (April and November 1993, Côte d'Ivoire); a Sub-Regional Workers' Education Seminar on International Labour Standards for the Andean countries (October 1993, Ecuador); a Sub-Regional Workers' Education Seminar on International Labour Standards and Freedom of Association for English-speaking countries of Eastern and Southern Africa (December 1993, Zimbabwe); and the Seventh Asian-Pacific Symposium on Standards-Related Topics (March-April 1993, China).

98. Programmes designed to familiarize national labour administration officials with the obligations of member States and ILO procedures relating to Conventions and Recomendations continued. A course for high-level specialists of legal departments or international affairs' departments of labour ministries of the Commonwealth of Independent States, the Baltic States and several other States were organized in collaboration with the ILO's International Training Centre (Turin). It was attended by 32 participants from the following countries: Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Mongolia, Russian Federation, Tajikistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan.

99. Activities for cooperation and the promotion of standards also took the form of participation in seminars, workshops and meetings, and the provision of advisory services concerning international labour standards in or for the following countries: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Belize, Cambodia, China, Colombia, Côte d'Ivoire, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, France, Germany, Grenada, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Malaysia, Namibia, Nepal, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Russian Federation, San Marino, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Saint Lucia, Switzerland, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Tunisia, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Uruguay, Viet Nam and Zimbabwe.

100. During the course of the year, comments and consultations on drafts of labour laws and related legislation of the following countries have been provided: Albania, Belarus, Belize, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Dominica, Egypt, El Salvador, Fiji, Ghana, Grenada, Guinea, Honduras, Islamic Republic of Iran, Italy, Kazakhstan, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Madagascar, Mauritania, Nigeria, Peru, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Uganda, Ukraine, United States and Zimbabwe.

B. Standards and technical cooperation

101. The Committee welcomes the Office's establishment of multidisciplinary teams in all regions which, along with its implementation of the active partnership policy, represents a new phase in the symbiosis of the ILO's standard-setting and technical cooperation activities. It supports the crucial contribution to be made by the teams' standards specialists. This takes the form, first, of assisting governments to fulfil standards-related obligations under the Constitution and encouraging national employers' and workers' organizations to play their roles; and, second, of trying to ensure that priorities articulated by international labour standards - especially standards which States have expressly identified as their priorities when they have ratified Conventions - are more fully reflected in national development planning and technical cooperation activities.

102. The Committee also notes with interest the continuing work done to inform and train ILO staff and constituents as to the relations between standards and technical cooperation.

103. Several meetings, training seminars and workshops on the relations between international labour standards and technical cooperation were organized at headquarters and in the field in various regions for ILO staff, constituents, donors and national counterparts.

104. Information was provided to the principal technical advisers and experts in the field of technical cooperation, and to the staff of field offices on the relationship between standards and technical cooperation. Courses on the same theme were also given regularly within the context of the training courses of the Turin Centre.

V. ROLE OF EMPLOYERS' AND WORKERS' ORGANIZATIONS

105. At each session, the Committee draws the attention of governments to the role that employers' and workers' organizations are called upon to play in the application of Conventions and Recommendations and to the fact that numerous Conventions require consultation with employers' and workers' organizations, or their collaboration in a variety of measures. The Committee notes with satisfaction that almost all governments have indicated in the reports supplied under articles 19 and 22 of the Constitution the representative organizations of employers and workers to which, in accordance with article 23, paragraph 2, of the Constitution, they have communicated copies of the reports supplied to the ILO. (Endnote 11) All governments have indicated the organizations to which they have communicated copies of the information supplied to the ILO on the submission to the competent authorities of the instruments adopted by the Conference and the reports due under article 19 of the Constitution.

106. In accordance with established practice, the ILO sent to the representative organizations of employers and workers a letter concerning the various opportunities open to them of contributing to the implementation of Conventions and Recommendations, accompanied by relevant documentary material, and a list of the reports due from their respective governments and copies of the Committee's comments to which the governments were invited to reply in their reports.

Observations made by employers' and workers' organizations

107. Since its last session, the Committee has received 251 observations, 43 of which were communicated by employers' organizations and 208 by workers' organizations. This is the highest number of observations ever received. It shows again the interest of employers' and workers' organizations in the implementation of ILO standards and reflects the constant efforts made by the supervisory bodies and the Office to give interested organizations complete information on their role in this area.

108. The majority of observations received (244) relate to the application of ratified Conventions. (Endnote 12) Seven observations relate to the reports provided by goverments under article 19 of the Constitution relating to the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize Convention, 1948 (No. 87) and the Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98). (Endnote 13)

109. The Committee notes that, of the observations received this year, 129 were transmitted directly to the International Labour Office which in accordance with the practice established by the Committee, referred them to the governments concerned for comment. In 122 cases the governments transmitted the observations with their reports, sometimes adding their own comments. Part Two of this Report contains the Committee's comments on cases where the observations raised an issue concerning the application of ratified Conventions.

110. The Committee also examined a number of other observations by employers' and workers' organizations, consideration of which had been postponed from the last session because the observations of the organizations or the replies of the governments had arrived just before or just after the session. It has had to postpone the examination of a number of observations to its next session, when they were received too close to or even during the Committee's present meeting to allow sufficient time for the governments concerned to make comments and for the Committee to consider the matters involved.

111. The Committee notes that in most cases the organizations of employers and workers endeavoured to gather and present precise facts on the application in practice of ratified Conventions. It notes that the matters dealt with in these observations have touched on a very wide range of Conventions relating, in particular, to the following subjects: protection of the right to organize and the right to collective bargaining, discrimination, forced labour, employment policy, labour inspection, wage protection, tripartite consultations relating to international labour standards, maritime labour.

112. The Committee notes lastly that the Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144), has now received 61 ratifications. Thus, the number of ratifications has more than doubled since the General Survey on the Convention in 1982, (Endnote 14) which noted favourable prospects in this respect. The Committee hopes that many other countries will be able to ratify it, all the more since some have recently adopted provisions to establish tripartite bodies for ILO activities, with reference to the 1976 instruments.

VI. REPORTS ON RATIFIED CONVENTIONS (articles 22 and 35 of the Constitution)

Supply of reports

113. The Committee's principal task consists of the examination of the reports supplied by governments on Conventions which have been ratified by member States or which have been declared applicable to non-metropolitan territories.

114. In accordance with the procedure for reporting that has been in force since 1977, detailed reports from all ratifying States, covering the period ending 30 June 1993, were due to be examined this year in respect of 38 Conventions. (Endnote 15) In addition, detailed reports were also requested from certain governments on other Conventions, in accordance with the criteria for more frequent reporting approved by the Governing Body and set out in paragraph 38 of the Committee's 1977 Report.

115. The Committee has noted what the consequences will be for the requesting of reports on the application of ratified Conventions or the provisions that the Governing Body has adopted regarding the adjustment of the regular supervisory procedures. (Endnote 16) The adjustments essentially concern the frequency of reports. As regards first reports, two detailed reports will be requested in the years following the entry into force of a Convention for the ratifying country. Detailed reports will be requested every two years for the ten Conventions regarded as priority ones: freedom of association (Nos. 87 and 98); forced labour (Nos. 29 and 105); equal treatment (Nos. 100 and 111); employment policy (No. 122); labour inspection (Nos. 81 and 129); tripartite consultations (No. 144). For all the other Conventions simplified reports will be requested every five years, except where the Committee of Experts has made an observation or a direct request calling for a reply or where it considers that a detailed report should be submitted on account of changes in legislation or practice. Non-periodic detailed reports will be required in certain cases, as previously, particularly following the receipt of observations made by employers' or workers' organizations, or when the Committee of Experts, on its own initiative or on the initiative of the Conference Committee, so requests. Lastly, requests for annual general reports will be discontinued. These new arrangements will be subjected to a trial period of five years. Finally, reports should be communicated by 1 June, and by 1 September at the latest. The date of the Committee of Experts' meeting has been set for the first two weeks of December. The new arrangements will take effect in 1995. The Committee hopes that these measures will considerably reduce the burden on member States and enable them better to fulfil their obligations under articles 19, 22 and 35 of the ILO Constitution.

Reports requested and received

116. A total of 1,906 detailed reports were requested from governments on the application of Conventions ratified by member States (article 22 of the Constitution). At the end of the present session of the Committee, 1,233 of these reports had been received by the Office. This figure corresponds to 64.6 per cent of the reports requested, compared with 65.4 per cent last year. The Committee regrets that, as indicated in paragraphs 128 and 129 below, a number of reports received are incomplete and do not enable it to reach conclusions regarding the application of the Conventions concerned. A table showing reports received and reports overdue, classified by country and by Convention, is to be found in Part II (section I, Appendix I). Another table (section I, Appendix II) shows, for each year in which the Committee has met since 1933, the number and percentage of reports received by the prescribed date, by the date of the meeting of the Committee, and by the date of the session of the International Labour Conference.

117. In addition, 387 reports were requested on Conventions declared applicable with or without modifications to non-metropolitan territories (articles 22 and 35 of the Constitution). Of these, 243 reports, 62.7 per cent, had been received by the end of the Committee's session, in comparison with 43.6 per cent in 1993. A list of the reports received and not received, classified by territory and by Convention, is to be found appended to section II of Part Two of this Report.

118. Apart from the above-mentioned reports, 17 governments also supplied general reports on the Conventions for which detailed reports were not due for the period under review: Benin, Belgium, Brazil, Costa Rica, Croatia, El Salvador, Ireland, Kenya, New Zealand, Panama, Poland, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Switzerland.

119. In those cases in which the reports were not accompanied by copies of the relevant legislation, statistical data or other documentation necessary for their full examination, and in which this material was not otherwise available, the Office, as requested by the Committee, wrote to the governments concerned asking them to supply the necessary texts to enable the Committee to fulfil its task.

Compliance with reporting obligations

120. Most of the governments from which reports were due on the application of ratified Conventions have supplied all or most of the reports requested, as can be seen from Appendix I, Part II, section I. However, 50 governments have not complied with their obligation to supply reports on ratified Conventions. Thus, all or the majority of the reports due this year have not been received from the following countries: Algeria, Bahrain, Barbados, Burkino Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Estonia, Gabon, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Jamaica, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Mongolia, Mozambique, Netherlands (Aruba), Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, United Arab Emirates, Zaire. No reports have been received for the past two or more years from the following countries: Afghanistan, Albania, Bahamas, Belize, Dominica, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Liberia, Nepal, Saint Lucia, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia.

121. The Committee urges the governments of these countries, and also of those which have sent only some of the reports due, to make every effort to supply the reports requested on ratified Conventions. Where no reports have been sent for a number of years, it is likely that particular problems of an administrative or technical nature are preventing the government concerned from fulfilling its obligations under the ILO Constitution, and it may be that in cases of this kind assistance from the Office, in particular the help of the technical advisers on standards, could enable the government to overcome its difficulties.

Late reports

122. The Committee is once again bound to emphasize the importance of communicating reports in due time. Reports are requested on ratified Conventions by 15 October each year at the latest. Due consideration is given, when fixing this date, to the time required to translate the reports, where necessary, to conduct research into legislation and other necessary documents, and to examine reports and legislation, etc. The supervisory procedure can function correctly only if reports are communicated in due time. This is particularly true in the case of first reports or reports on Conventions where there are serious or continuing discrepancies, which the Committee has to examine in greater depth.

123. The Committee observes that the great majority of reports are thus received between the time-limit fixed and the date on which the Committee meets: by 15 October 1993, the proportion of reports received was only 24.7 per cent. The Committee is very concerned at this percentage, which is very low, and notes that it is often the first reports and those relating to Conventions on which the Committee has made comments that are received the latest. In these circumstances, the Committee has been bound in recent years to postpone to its following session the examination of an increasing number of reports, since they could not be examined with the necessary care owing to lack of time. It has thus had to examine a number of reports at its present session held over from 1993.

124. The Committee must point out yet again that it is extremely concerned at this state of affairs. It trusts that, with the introduction of the adjustments to the regular supervisory procedure adopted by the Governing Body (see paragraph 115 above), governments will in future endeavour to observe the time-limits laid down for the sending of their reports so that it can carry out its supervisory function adequately.

Supply of first reports

125. A total of 65 first reports of the 100 due on the application of ratified Conventions were received by the time that the Committee's session opened. A number of countries have failed to supply first reports, some of which are more than a year overdue. Thus, certain first reports on ratified Conventions have not been received from the following States: Cameroon (Convention No. 106) since 1990; Yemen (Conventions Nos. 122, 156 and 158) since 1991; Côte d'Ivoire (Convention No. 133), France (Convention No. 133), France (French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Réunion (Convention No. 133), French Southern and Antarctic Territories (Conventions Nos. 53, 69, 74, 92, 133 and 134), Liberia (Convention No. 133) and Nigeria (Convention No. 133) since 1992.

126. The Committee recalls that particular importance attaches to the first reports on the basis of which it makes it initial assessment of the observance of ratified Conventions. It therefore requests the governments concerned to make a special effort to supply these reports.

Replies to comments of the supervisory bodies

127. Governments are requested to reply in their reports to the observations and direct requests of the Committee, and the majority of governments have provided the replies requested. In accordance with the established practice, the International Labour Office wrote to all the governments who failed to provide such replies, requesting them to supply the necessary information. Of the 40 governments to which such letters were sent, only five have provided the information requested.

128. The Committee notes with concern that there are still many cases of failure to reply to its comments; either:

(a) out of all the reports requested from governments, no report or reply has been received;

(b) the reports received contained no reply to most of the Committee's comments (observations and/or direct requests) and/or did not reply to the letters sent by the Office.

129. In all there were 353 such cases, (Endnote 17) as compared to 318 last year and 330 the previous year. The Committee is concerned by the number of these cases, which is still very high. It is bound to repeat the observations or direct requests already made on the Conventions in question.

130. The failure of the governments concerned to fulfil their obligations considerably hinders the work of the Committee of Experts and that of the Conference Committee, and the Committee of Experts cannot overemphasize the special importance of ensuring the dispatch of the reports and the replies to its comments on time.

Examination of reports

131. In examining the reports received on ratified Conventions and Conventions declared applicable to non-metropolitan territories, the Committee has followed its usual practice of assigning to each of its members the initial responsibility for a group of Conventions. Reports received early enough are sent to the members concerned in advance of the Committee's session. The members submit their preliminary conclusions on the instruments for which they are responsible to all their colleagues for their examination. These conclusions are then presented to the Committee in plenary sitting by their respective authors for discussion and approval.

Observations and direct requests

132. In the majority of cases, the Committee has found that no comment is called for regarding the way in which a ratified Convention has been implemented. In other cases, however, the Committee has found it necessary to draw the attention of the governments concerned to the need to take further action to give effect to certain provisions of Conventions or to supply additional information on given points. As in previous years, its comments have been drawn up in the form either of "observations" which are reproduced in the Report of the Committee, or of "direct requests", which are not published in the report, but are communicated directly to the governments concerned.

133. As previously, the Committee has indicated by footnotes the cases in which, because of the nature of the problems met in the application of the Conventions concerned, it has seemed appropriate to ask the Government to supply a detailed report earlier than would otherwise have been the case. Under the system of spacing out reports over a four-year period which applies to most Conventions and is still in effect this year, such early reports have been requested after an interval of either one or two years, according to circumstances. In some instances, the Committee has also requested the Government to supply full particulars to the Conference at its next session in June 1994.

134. The observations of the Committee appear in Part Two (sections I and II) of the present report, together with a list under each Convention of any direct requests. An index of all observations and direct requests - classified by country - will be found at the beginning of this report.

Cases of progress

135. In accordance with its usual practice, the Committee has drawn up a list of the cases in which it has been able to express its satisfaction at certain measures taken by governments to make the necessary changes in their country's law or practice following comments by the Committee on the degree of conformity between national law or practice and the provisions of a ratified Convention. Details concerning the cases in question are to be found in Part II of this report and cover 42 instances in which measures of this kind have been taken in 30 States and one non-metropolitan territory. The full list is as follows:

Cases of progress Conventions Nos.

Australia 100

Non-metropolitan territories

France St. Pierre and Miquelon 19

136. Thus, the total number of cases in which the Committee has been led to express its satisfaction with the progress achieved following its comments has risen to 2,034 since the Committee began listing them in its reports in 1964. In addition, there have been many cases in which the Committee has been able to note with interest various measures that have been taken following its comments with a view to ensuring a fuller application of ratified Conventions. All these cases provide an indication of the efforts made by governments to ensure that their national law and practice are in conformity with the provisions of the ILO Conventions they have ratified.

137. These cases do not, however, as the Committee regularly points out, exhaust the instances in which Conventions and Recommendations have a measurable influence on the law and practice of member States. For example, the Committee has again noted a number of cases this year in which it is clear from the first report on the application of a Convention that new legislative or other measures were adopted shortly before or after ratification.

Practical application

138. As in previous years, the Committee has been concerned with assessing, on the basis of the information available, the extent to which national legislation giving effect to ratified Conventions is applied in practice. A number of questions designed to elicit information on this point are included in the report forms approved by the Governing Body for the Conventions, and the replies of governments to these questions constitute an appreciable, though uneven, source of information on practical application available to the Committee. The Committee has also taken into account other authoritative sources of information. These consist of the annual reports of labour inspection services, statistical yearbooks published in the States or by the ILO, observations of employers' or workers' organizations, compilations of judicial or administrative decisions, reports on direct contacts, reports on technical cooperation projects and missions, and other official publications such as manuals, studies and economic and social development plans.

139. The Committee notes with interest that this year some 67 per cent of the reports supplied on Conventions for which information on practical application was specifically requested contained such data. This percentage is higher than that of 1993 and that of 1992. The Committee none the less reiterates its appeal to governments to make every effort to include the information requested in their reports.

140. The following countries have provided information on practical application in more than half the reports concerned: Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Brazil, Cameroon, Canada, Cap Verde, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Cyprus, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Malawi, Malta, Netherlands, Niger, Norway, Panama, Portugal, Romania, Rwanda, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Sudan, Sweden, Switzerland, Syrian Arab Republic, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, Tunisia, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yemen and Zambia.

141. The Committee wishes particularly to thank governments that have given information on practical application in their reports, as this information has greatly helped it in assessing more accurately the extent to which ratified Conventions are actually applied in these countries.

142. As in previous years, the Committee has addressed direct requests to certain countries which have not replied to the questions in the report forms on practical application. The Committee notes that, again this year, the majority of the countries in question are developing countries and that certain of them have referred specifically to difficulties of a financial and/or administrative nature which are preventing them from compiling the statistical and other information requested. The Committee is of the opinion that these are also cases in which technical assistance from the International Labour Office could assist in overcoming the difficulties in question.

143. The Committee also notes with interest the judicial and administrative decisions on questions of principle relating to the application of ratified Conventions to which certain countries have referred in their reports. It noted that 52 reports contain information of this kind and thereby throw additional light on the problems raised in these cases by the practical application of the Conventions in question.

144. For many years, the Committee has been noting that provisions concerning sanctions to secure observance of measures taken under the provisions of the Conventions to ensure their application are often inadequate because the sanctions laid down do not have a sufficiently dissuasive effect, particularly where violations of basic human rights are concerned. It once again draws attention to the importance of establishing effective sanctions and of adapting monetary penalties, particularly in countries with high rates of inflation, in such a way that they exert an effective preventive influence against acts contrary to the guarantees laid down by international labour Conventions. The Committee again requests governments to indicate in their reports the measures taken to examine the need to adapt monetary penalties from time to time in the light of inflation or to determine the amount of such penalties in such a way as to take account of currency fluctuations.

VII. SUBMISSION OF CONVENTIONS AND

Recommendations

145. In accordance with its terms of reference, the Committee this year examined the following information (Endnote 18) supplied by the governments of member States, pursuant to article 19 of the Constitution of the International Labour Organization:

(a) information on the steps taken to submit to the competent authorities within the time-limit of 12 or 18 months, as provided for in the Constitution, the following instruments adopted at the 79th Session of the Conference (1992): the Protection of Workers' Claims (Employer's Insolvency) Convention (No. 173) and Recommendation (No. 180), 1992;

(b) additional information on the steps taken to submit to the competent authorities the instruments adopted by the Conference from its 31st (1948) to its 78th (1990) Sessions (Conventions Nos. 87 to 172 and Recommendations Nos. 83 to 179);

(c) replies to the observations and direct requests made by the Committee in 1993.

79th Session

146. The Committee notes with interest that the governments of the following member States have indicated that they have submitted to the authorities considered by them to be competent the instruments adopted by the Conference at its 79th Session: Argentina, Australia, Barbados, Belarus, Bolivia, Burundi, Cape Verde, Côte d'Ivoire, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon, Ghana, Grenada, Iceland, Indonesia, Islamic Republic of Iran, Iraq, Japan, Korea (Republic of), Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, Morocco, Myanmar, Namibia, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Rwanda, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Viet Nam and Zimbabwe.

31st to 78th Sessions

147. The Committee notes with interest that considerable efforts have been made by several governments to submit instruments adopted by the Conference since its 31st Session to the competent authorities, particularly in the following cases: Botswana (76th to 78th Sessions), Greece (76th, 77th and 78th Sessions), Grenada (78th and 79th Sessions), India (74th, 76th and 77th Sessions), Mauritius (64th, 68th and 77th Sessions), Niger (75th, 76th and 78th Sessions), Syrian Arab Republic (65th, 69th (Convention No. 159), 71st, 72nd, 74th, 75th and 76th Sessions) and Uruguay (76th, 77th (Convention No. 171 and Recommendation No. 178), 78th and 79th Sessions).

148. The table in Appendix I to section III of Part Two of the Report of the Committee shows the position of each member State as it emerges from the information supplied by the governments, with regard to the discharge of the obligation to submit Conventions and Recommendations adopted by the Conference to the competent authorities. Appendix II shows the overall position in this respect for the instruments adopted from the 31st to the 79th Sessions of the Conference.

General aspects

149. The Committee notes with concern that many countries are late - sometimes very late - in submitting to the competent authorities the instruments adopted by the Conference. In other cases, submission does not appear to have been accompanied by proposals on the action to be taken concerning the instruments being considered.

150. The Committee wishes to emphasize that the submission to the competent authorities of the instruments adopted by the Conference is a fundamental obligation which constitutes the indispensable first step in implementing international labour standards. In order that national authorities may be kept up to date on the standards adopted at the international level, which may require action in each State so as to give effect to them at the national level, submission should be made as early as possible and in any case within the time-limits set by article 19 of the ILO Constitution. Governments, however, remain entirely free to propose any action which they may judge appropriate in respect of Conventions and Recommendations. The principal aim of the submission is to encourage a rapid and responsible decision by each member State on the Conventions and Recommendations adopted by the Conference.

Comments of the Committee and replies from governments

151. In section III of Part Two of this report, the Committee makes individual observations on the points that it considers should be brought to the special attention of governments. In six of these observations, the Committee has expressed its satisfaction at the measures taken (in Fiji, Gabon, Islamic Republic of Iran, Mali, Panama and Uganda) for the submission of instruments to the competent authorities. In addition, requests with a view to obtaining supplementary information on other points have also been addressed directly to a number of countries, which are listed at the end of section III.

152. The Committee once again regrets to note that a number of governments have again failed to provide replies to its comments, even after reminders have been sent by the Office in accordance with the request made to it by the Committee (See Part II, section IV of this report). The Committee again expresses the hope that governments will endeavour in future to supply all the required information and documents.

153. The Committee wishes once more to point out the importance of the communication by governments of the information and documents called for in points I and II of the questionnaire in the Memorandum adopted by the Governing Body. Some governments do not communicate the information and documents in question. The Committee trusts that the governments concerned will take suitable measures to comply with the Memorandum on submission to the competent authorities.

Special problems

154. The Committee is bound to note with regret that no information has been supplied by the following 23 governments showing that the Conventions and Recommendations adopted by the Conference during at least the last seven sessions (from the 71st to the 78th Sessions) (Endnote 19) have in fact been submitted to the competent authorities: Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Bangladesh, Belize, Cambodia, Central African Republic, Congo, Costa Rica, Djibouti, El Salvador, Guyana, Jamaica, Kenya, Madagascar, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, St. Lucia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, United Republic of Tanzania, Trinidad and Tobago and Zaire. The fact that so many countries have accumulated a long backlog in this context is a cause of deep concern to the Committee. Indeed, there is a danger that certain countries may find it difficult, if not impossible, to bring themselves up to date. What is more, neither the legislative authorities nor public opinion in these countries are regularly informed of the existence of new instruments as the Conference adopts them, which defeats the real purpose of the obligation to submit explained in paragraph 150 above. In this context, the Committee would like to point out once again that the obligation of submission does not imply that governments must ratify the Conventions or accept the Recommendations in question. The Committee therefore expresses the firm hope that the governments concerned will promptly undertake to submit the instruments adopted at the sessions indicated and that it will be able to note the progress made in this respect in its next report. The Committee finally recalls that governments have the possibility of asking the International Labour Office for the technical assistance which it is able to provide to endeavour to solve this type of problem.

Submission of certain instruments to the appropriate authorities of the European Union

155. During the past year, a Member State of the European Union (Greece) stated that it had submitted the Chemicals Convention (No. 170) and Recommendation (No. 177), 1990, to the appropriate authorities of the European Community, in accordance with the procedure of which the Committee became aware a few years ago in connection with Conventions Nos. 153 and 162 and the corresponding Recommendations. In its report, the above Government stated that the consultations provided for in article 23, paragraph 2, of the ILO Constitution and by the Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144), will be pursued at the national level.

VIII. INSTRUMENTS CHOSEN FOR REPORTS UNDER ARTICLE 19 OF THE CONSTITUTION

156. In accordance with the decisions taken by the Governing Body, governments were requested to supply reports under article 19, paragraphs 5 and 7, of the ILO Constitution on the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize Convention, 1948 (No. 87) and the Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

157. A total of 106 reports were requested only from the States that have not yet ratified the Conventions concerned and 54 received. (Endnote 20) This represents 50.9 per cent of the reports requested.

158. The Committee notes with regret that, for the past five years, none of the reports on unratified Conventions and Recommendations requested under article 19 of the ILO Constitution has been received from: Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Namibia, Papua New Guinea, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Somalia and Zaire.

159. The Committee can only urge governments once again to provide the reports requested so that its General Surveys can be as comprehensive as possible.

General Survey

160. Part Three of this report (issued separately as Report III (Part 4B)) contains the General Survey of the Committee on questions covered by Conventions Nos. 87 and 98. The survey, in accordance with the practice followed in previous years, has been prepared on the basis of a preliminary examination by a working party comprising five persons appointed by the Committee from among its members.

161. Lastly, the Committee would like to express its appreciation for the invaluable assistance again rendered to it by the officials of the ILO, whose competence and devotion to duty make it possible for the Committee to accomplish its increasingly complex task in a limited period of time.

Geneva, 25 February 1994. (Signed) J.M. Ruda,

E. Razafindralambo,

Endnotes

Endnote 2

Endnote 3

Endnote 4

Endnote 5

Endnote 6

Endnote 7

Endnote 8

Endnote 9

Endnote 10

Endnote 11

Endnote 12

Endnote 13

Endnote 14

Endnote 15

Endnote 16

Endnote 17

Endnote 18

Endnote 19

Endnote 20