Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) - Mali (Ratification: 1960)
Protocol of 2014 to the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 - Mali (Ratification: 2016)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

1. Trafficking in persons. In its previous comments the Committee noted that the Penal Code (Act No. 01-079 of 20 August 2001) did not expressly define trafficking of persons but contained provisions under which perpetrators of this offence could be prosecuted, tried and sentenced (sections 242 and 243). The Committee requested the Government to provide information on any judicial action taken to punish those responsible for trafficking of persons for the purpose of sexually exploiting them or exploiting their labour. The Committee notes that in its report, the Government refers to a case heard by the Court of First Instance of Sikasso in which the perpetrators were referred to the Cour d’assise, but says that it has no copy of the judicial decision or any information on the sentence handed down. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on such judicial actions, specifying the basis in law both for the prosecution, and on the sentence handed down. Please provide copies of relevant judicial decisions. More generally, the Committee would be grateful for more detailed information in the Government’s next report on the measures taken or envisaged to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons. The Government is asked to refer to the Committee’s general observation of 2000, to which it has not replied.

2. Article 2(2)(a) and (d) of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section L6(2) of the Labour Code excluded from the prohibition of forced or compulsory labour “work required in the public interest by legislative provisions on the organization of defence, the creation of a national service or participation in development”. It further noted that requisitioning in situations other than mobilization or wartime was allowed under section 25 of Act No. 87‑48 AN-RM on the requisitioning of persons and property, the objective of which is to determine the conditions governing the right to requisition in the cases envisaged by the Acts on the general organization of defence and state of emergency. In order to be able to assess the effect of these provisions on the application of the Convention, the Committee requested the Government to provide copies of the legislation on the organization of defence, national service and state of emergency.

In its report, the Government states that it will provide a copy of the legislation on national service and state of emergency, but that it does not have the legislation on the organization of defence. The Government reiterates that it has never made use of the provisions of section L6(2) of the Labour Code. It further states that persons are requisitioned only in exceptional circumstances, namely in cases of force majeure or any circumstances that endanger or threaten to endanger the lives or normal living conditions of the whole or part of the population.

The Committee takes notes of this information. It hopes that copies of the abovementioned legislation will be appended to the Government’s next report, including a copy of the Act on the organization of defence, so that the Committee may assess the effect of the provisions of section L6(2) of the Labour Code on the application of the Convention.

With regard to work in the general interest that may be required pursuant to the legislative provisions on participation in development, the Committee refers to the direct request it is addressing to the Government on the application of the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105).

3. Article 2(2)(c). Work in the general interest. The Committee noted previously that the Penal Code included “work in the general interest” as a new penalty for offences. Such work is an alternative to imprisonment and its purpose is to promote better conditions for the rehabilitation, social reintegration and correction of the offender (sections 7(2) and 14 of the Penal Code). The Committee requested the Government to provide information on how this penalty is applied in practice. Referring to a bill establishing and regulating the penalty of work in the general interest, supplied by the Government in 2000, the Committee also asked the Government to specify the associations recognized to be of public interest for which offenders may be required to perform work in the general interest. In its latest report the Government states that it has no information on the bill and is unable to provide a list of such associations. The Committee understands that no provisions have been adopted to govern the application of the penalty of work in the general interest provided for in section 14 of the Penal Code. It requests the Government to state whether this is correct and to provide information on any new developments in this area. The Committee points out that under Article 2, paragraph 2(c), of the Convention, convicts may not be hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate whether the courts have handed down any sentences of work in the general interest and, if so, to provide a copy of the relevant court decisions.

4. Slavery-like practices and hereditary servitude. The Committee notes that in its concluding observations on Mali’s second periodic report, the Human Rights Committee regretted that Mali had not given a clear response to reports of slavery-like practices and hereditary servitude in the north of the country. While domestic law does not authorize such practices, the abovementioned committee expressed serious concern about their possible survival among the descendants of slaves and the descendants of slave-owners. It invited Mali to conduct a careful study of the relations between the descendants of slaves and the descendants of slave-owners in the north of the country, with a view to determining whether slavery-like practices and hereditary servitude still continued (report CCPR/CO/77/MLI, 16 April 2003, paragraph 16). The Committee points out that slavery-like practices and hereditary servitude, if they were proven still to exist, would constitute a serious breach of the Convention. It would therefore be grateful if the Government would provide detailed information on the situation in the north of the country. Please indicate in particular whether any investigations have been conducted in this region and, if so, provide information on the results obtained and any measures taken by the Government.