 |
Disclaimer webinfo@ilo.org |
ILCCR: General Observation concerning Comoros. Published: 2007Description:(ILCCR General Observation) Country:(Comoros) Session of the Conference:96 Document:22 Display the document in: French Spanish Document No. (ilolex): 122007COM 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. ------------------------ III. Reports on unratified Conventions, Recommendations (Article 19 of the Constitution)(a) Failure to supply reports for the past five years on unratified Conventions and Recommendations A Government representative of Armenia reiterated her Government's commitment to fulfilling all its obligations as an ILO member. The information concerning submission in accordance with article 19 of the ILO Constitution had been transmitted to the ILO in May 2007. As required, the Government had submitted all Conventions and Recommendations adopted by the 80th and subsequent sessions of the International Labour Conference to the National Assembly. A Government representative of Bosnia and Herzegovina stated that the authorities of her country had made consid-erable efforts to fulfil their reporting obligations under article 19 of the ILO Constitution. It was expected that, with ILO assistance, the preparation and submission of all outstanding reports, including those under article 19, would be possible before the end of 2007. A Government representative of Djibouti recalled that his country had ratified no less than 68 Conventions since its accession to independence, and that the burden of work hence exceeded the limited means of its governmental institutions. In that regard, the Government of Djibouti remained vigilant as to the periods during which it would be able to denounce the Conventions that were not of utmost relevance to the country. The Government undertook nonetheless to make every effort to submit the reports due to the Committee. A Government representative of The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia informed the Committee that during the past year, his Government had been focusing, as a priority, on fulfilling its reporting obligations concerning ratified fundamental Conventions. Due to time constraints and lack of resources, the Government had not been in a position to prepare reports on non-ratified Conventions. However, it paid the utmost attention to its obligations under the ILO Constitution and it was hoped that, with ILO assistance, it would be possible to submit all reports before the next session of the Conference. A Government representative of Kiribati stated that the process of dealing with non-ratified Conventions did not pose any serious problems. With ILO assistance, the Government continued to work with the key stakeholders towards ratification before the next session of the Conference. The Committee noted the information and explanations provided by the Government representatives who took the floor. The Committee stressed the importance it attached to the constitutional obligation of supplying reports on unratified Conventions and Recommendations. Such reports made it possible to evaluate the situation more fully in the context of the General Surveys prepared by the Committee of Experts. The Committee recalled that the ILO could offer technical assistance to contribute to the fulfilment of this obligation. The Committee urged all member States to comply with their obligations in this respect and expressed the firm hope that the Governments of Albania, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cape Verde, Comoros, Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Guinea, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Liberia, Sao Tome and Principe, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Tajikistan, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Turkmenistan, Uganda and Uzbekistan would comply in the future with their obligations under article 19 of the Constitution. The Committee decided to mention these cases in the appropriate section of its General Report. The Worker members recalled that the obligation to submit reports was a key element of the ILO supervisory system. In that regard, they believed that governments not submitting their reports benefited from an unjustified advantage compared to those that fulfilled that obligation, since they de facto eluded examination by the Committee on the Application of Standards. The Employer members thanked the governments that had submitted outstanding reports in the meantime and those that provided information to the Committee explaining their situation. It was evident that failure to submit instruments to the competent authorities and to report fundamentally undermined the ratification and implementation process. When ILO instruments were not submitted to the competent authorities, ratification could not take place. Information reported for the purpose of General Surveys enabled the Committee of Experts to identify obstacles to application and to provide suggestions for overcoming them. Once a Convention had been ratified, first reports were crucial to enable the Committee of Experts to assess the level of application by the ratifying country and to make comments. Without reporting, the supervisory system as a whole could not function. The ILO should therefore establish contacts with the countries concerned that were not accredited to the Conference. In case of substantial inability of a government to report, the Office should provide technical assistance. In addition, the possibility that countries with strong reporting systems could assist countries lacking such capacity was raised. In conclusion, the Employer members stressed that those matters were among the most important issues discussed by the Committee. |
| ILO Home | NORMES home | ILOLEX home | Universal Query | NATLEX |
|
Disclaimer webinfo@ilo.org |