 |
Disclaimer webinfo@ilo.org |
ILCCR: General Observation concerning Belize. Published: 2007Description:(ILCCR General Observation) Country:(Belize) Session of the Conference:96 Document:22 Display the document in: French Spanish Document No. (ilolex): 122007BLZ I. Observations and Information concerning Reports on ratified Conventions (Articles 22 and 35 of the Constitution) A. Discussion of cases of serious failure by member States to respect their reporting and other standards-related obligations (c) Failure to supply information in reply to comments made by the Committee of Experts A Government representative of Comoros explained that, for the past ten years, her country had been experiencing difficulties, which had largely destabilized governmental institutions. At that time, those institutions were progressively being reestablished in accordance with law, and, thanks to the support of the ILO Office in Addis Ababa as regards training labour administration staff, the governmental services were undertaking to fulfil the standards-related obligations of Comoros. A Government representative of Congo indicated that the reports requested for 2006 and 2007 had already been prepared and were being submitted to the social partners. Concerning the response to the Committee of Experts' comments, Congo had received the relevant observations and direct requests from the Director of the ILO Office in Kinshasa on 8 May 2007. The Government undertook to submit the replies due before 1 September 2007. A Government representative of Djibouti stated that the reports expected had been prepared and submitted to the Office, but it appeared that they did not meet the Committee of Experts' expectations. The Government of Djibouti therefore undertook to review the reports and ensure that, in the future, they were submitted on time and met the Committee of Experts' expectations. A Government representative of France indicated that her Government regretted not having been able to supply the information requested from the Department of Martinique, in order to respond to the Committee of Experts' comments within the prescribed time limits. This was due to a lack of capacity, particularly concerning the officer in charge of Martinique, and to the significant number of reports on the application of ratified Conventions to be submitted to the ILO, including for the non-metropolitan territories. France was committed to its constitutional obligations and undertook to submit the reports due as soon as possible. A Government representative of Jordan expressed his surprise that the reports sent by his Government in 2006 had not been received by the ILO. Jordan had never failed to supply the reports requested. In the meantime, the Government had sent copies of the outstanding reports. In addition, the speaker informed the Committee that an agreement had been made with the ILO regarding training relevant officials. A Government representative of Kiribati recognized that the comments made by the Committee of Experts were of urgent importance. The harmonization of the legal and political situation with Conventions Nos 87 and 98 was ongoing. A Government representative of the Russian Federation stated that his Government was firmly committed to fulfilling its obligations in the context of the supervisory system. Efforts were being made to submit reports in a timely manner. The difficulties in replying to the Committee of Experts' comments were due to technical problems arising out of the recent restructuring of the government units responsible. All missing information would be provided to the ILO before 1 September 2007. A Government representative of San Marino explained that the failure to submit replies to most of the Committee of Experts' comments was linked to the delay accumulated by the Ministry of Labour, the competent body for the preparation of reports due to the Committee of Experts, over the last three years. He indicated, however, that new staff had assumed office in 2006 and were undertaking to eliminate the accumulated delay. The submission of the reports on Conventions Nos 29, 87, 105 and 160 - albeit past the deadline of 1 September 2006 - represented the first fruits of their work. Among those four reports, two also contained responses to the direct requests made by the Committee of Experts. He reiterated that the delay should not be construed as a lack of commitment by San Marino to the obligations of member States or to the supervision of international labour standards. The Committee noted the information and explanations provided by the Government representatives who took the floor. The Committee emphasized the great importance, for the continuation of dialogue, of providing clear and full information in reply to comments made by the Committee of Experts. It reiterated that this formed part of the constitutional obligation to supply reports. In this respect, the Committee expressed its great concern at the high number of cases of failure to supply information in reply to comments made by the Committee of Experts. The Committee recalled that governments could request ILO technical assistance to overcome any difficulties they might face in responding to the comments of the Committee of Experts. The Committee urged the Governments of Albania, Belize, Bolivia, Cambodia, Comoros, Congo, Cyprus, Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, France (Martinique), Guinea, Haiti, Iraq, Jordan, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Liberia, Malawi, Russian Federation, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, San Marino, Sierra Leone, Tajikistan, Togo, Uganda, United Kingdom (Anguilla, Montserrat, St Helena) and Uzbekistan to make every effort to provide the requested information as soon as possible. The Committee decided to mention these cases in the appropriate section of its General Report. |
| ILO Home | NORMES home | ILOLEX home | Universal Query | NATLEX |
|
Disclaimer webinfo@ilo.org |