Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Armenia (Ratification: 2004)

Replies received to the issues raised in a direct request which do not give rise to further comments (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government, which answers the points raised in its previous direct request, and has no further matters to raise in this regard.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for the expression of political or ideological views. The Committee previously noted that the Criminal Code provides for sanctions involving compulsory labour (imprisonment for a term of up to four years or correctional labour for a term of up to two years (section 56)) for “inciting national, racial or religious hatred” (section 226(1)). In this respect, the Committee notes with interest that section 56 of the Criminal Code which defined the correctional labour as a form of penalty has been repealed (Law on Amendments of the Criminal Code of 1 July 2006). Therefore, the penalties of imprisonment involving compulsory correctional labour imposed under section 226(1) are no longer applicable.

The Committee previously noted that under section 15(2) of the Law on Conducting Meetings, Assemblies, Rallies and Demonstrations, of 28 April 2004, organizers of a public event conducted in violation of the provisions of the Law, or organizers and participants failing to comply with the requirements for termination thereof, shall be liable by law. The Committee requested the Government to provide further information on the scope of such liability, indicating the penalties which might be imposed.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that by virtue of the Law “on the Freedom of Assemblies”, of 14 April 2011, the Law on Conducting Meetings, Assemblies, Rallies and Demonstrations of 28 April 2004 was repealed. Regarding the penalties imposed on participants who are held liable, the Committee notes that a fine of 200–300 times the minimum wage or imprisonment for a term of up to two months is applicable for organizing and conducting on purpose an assembly in violation of the procedure established by law. Moreover, a fine of 300–500 times the minimum wage or an imprisonment for a term of up to three months is applicable for making calls not to comply with the requests of the police representative to terminate the assembly (section 225 of the Criminal Code as repealed by Law of December 2004)

Article 1(c). Penal sanctions applicable to public officials. The Committee previously noted that, under section 315(1) of the Criminal Code (“Official negligence”), the non-performance or improper performance of one’s duties by a public servant as the result of a negligent attitude, causing substantial harm to persons or organizations, or to state interests, is punishable by correctional labour or arrest (which involves an obligation to perform labour).

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that following the Law on Amendments of the Criminal Code of 1 July 2006, section 315 was repealed, and hence the penalty of correctional labour is no longer applicable.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report contains no reply to its previous comments. It hopes that the next report will include full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Repetition

Communication of texts. The Committee again requests the Government to provide copies of laws and regulations governing the execution of penal sentences.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for the expression of political or ideological views. The Committee previously noted that the Criminal Code provides for sanctions involving compulsory labour (imprisonment for a term of up to four years or correctional labour for a term of up to two years) for “inciting national, racial or religious hatred” (section 226(1)).

The Committee recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views, or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It refers in this connection to paragraph 154 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, where it observed that the Convention does not prohibit punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence, incite to violence, or engage in preparatory acts aimed at violence; but sanctions involving compulsory labour fall within the scope of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the peaceful expression of views, or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system, whether such prohibition is imposed by law or by a discretionary administrative decision.

The Committee notes the Government’s indications in the report concerning the number of convictions under section 226(1) of the Criminal Code during the period between 2004 and June 2009. Noting that the Government’s report contains no other information on this issue, the Committee again requests the Government to provide sample copies of the court decisions, which could define or illustrate the scope of section 226(1), so as to enable the Committee to ascertain whether it is applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

The Committee previously noted that under section 15(2) of the Law on Conducting Meetings, Assemblies, Rallies and Demonstrations, 2004, organizers of a public event conducted in violation of the provisions of the Law, or organizers and participants failing to comply with the requirements for termination thereof, shall be liable by law. The Committee again requests the Government to clarify the scope of such liability, indicating the penalties which might be imposed, and to supply copies of the relevant provisions.

Article 1(c). Penal sanctions applicable to public officials. The Committee notes that, under section 315(1) of the Criminal Code (“Official negligence”), the non-performance or improper performance of one’s duties by a public servant as the result of a negligent attitude, causing substantial harm to persons or organizations, or to state interests, is punishable by correctional labour or arrest (which involves an obligation to perform labour).

The Committee notes the Government’s indications in the report concerning the number of convictions under section 315(1) during the period between 2004 and June 2009. It requests the Government to provide, in its next report, more detailed information on the court decisions passed under section 315(1) of the Criminal Code, which could define or illustrate its scope, including sample copies of such decisions, in order to enable the Committee to ascertain whether this provision is not used as a means of labour discipline within the meaning of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

Communication of texts. The Committee again requests the Government to provide copies of laws and regulations governing the execution of penal sentences.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for the expression of political or ideological views. The Committee previously noted that the Criminal Code provides for sanctions involving compulsory labour (imprisonment for a term of up to four years or correctional labour for a term of up to two years) for “inciting national, racial or religious hatred” (section 226(1)).

The Committee recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views, or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It refers in this connection to paragraph 154 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, where it observed that the Convention does not prohibit punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence, incite to violence, or engage in preparatory acts aimed at violence; but sanctions involving compulsory labour fall within the scope of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the peaceful expression of views, or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system, whether such prohibition is imposed by law or by a discretionary administrative decision.

The Committee notes the Government’s indications in the report concerning the number of convictions under section 226(1) of the Criminal Code during the period between 2004 and June 2009. Noting that the Government’s report contains no other information on this issue, the Committee again requests the Government to provide sample copies of the court decisions, which could define or illustrate the scope of section 226(1), so as to enable the Committee to ascertain whether it is applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

The Committee previously noted that under section 15(2) of the Law on Conducting Meetings, Assemblies, Rallies and Demonstrations, 2004, organizers of a public event conducted in violation of the provisions of the Law, or organizers and participants failing to comply with the requirements for termination thereof, shall be liable by law. The Committee again requests the Government to clarify the scope of such liability, indicating the penalties which might be imposed, and to supply copies of the relevant provisions.

Article 1(c). Penal sanctions applicable to public officials. The Committee notes that, under section 315(1) of the Criminal Code (“Official negligence”), the non-performance or improper performance of one’s duties by a public servant as the result of a negligent attitude, causing substantial harm to persons or organizations, or to state interests, is punishable by correctional labour or arrest (which involves an obligation to perform labour).

The Committee notes the Government’s indications in the report concerning the number of convictions under section 315(1) during the period between 2004 and June 2009. It requests the Government to provide, in its next report, more detailed information on the court decisions passed under section 315(1) of the Criminal Code, which could define or illustrate its scope, including sample copies of such decisions, in order to enable the Committee to ascertain whether this provision is not used as a means of labour discipline within the meaning of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

The Committee has noted with interest the information provided by the Government in its first report on the application of the Convention. It requests the Government to supply, with its next report, copies of laws and regulations governing the execution of penal sentences. Please also provide additional information on the following points.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for the expression of political or ideological views. 1. The Committee notes that the Criminal Code provides for sanctions involving compulsory labour (imprisonment for a term of up to four years or correctional labour for a term of up to two years) for “inciting national, racial or religious hatred” (section 226(1)).

 The Committee recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It refers in this connection to paragraph 154 of its General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour, where it observed that the Convention does not prohibit punishment by penalties involving compulsory labour of persons who use violence, incite to violence or engage in preparatory acts aimed at violence; but sanctions involving compulsory labour fall within the scope of the Convention where they enforce a prohibition of the peaceful expression of views or of opposition to the established political, social or economic system, whether such prohibition is imposed by law or by a discretionary administrative decision.

The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the application of the abovementioned section 226(1) in practice, including copies of any court decisions defining or illustrating its scope, so as to enable the Committee to ascertain whether it is applied in a manner compatible with the Convention.

2. The Committee notes that under section 15(2) of the Law on Conducting Meetings, Assemblies, Rallies and Demonstrations, 2004, organizers of a public event conducted in violation of the provisions of the Law, or organizers and participants failing to comply with the requirements for termination thereof, shall be liable by law. The Committee requests the Government to clarify the scope of such liability, indicating the penalties which might be imposed and to supply copies of the relevant provisions.

Article 1(c). Penal sanctions applicable to public officials. The Committee notes that, under section 315(1) of the Criminal Code (“official negligence”), the non-performance or improper performance by a public servant of his/her duties as the result of a negligent attitude, causing substantial harm to persons or organizations, or to state interests, is punishable by correctional labour or arrest (which involves an obligation to perform labour).

The Committee requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the court decisions passed under section 315(1) of the Criminal Code, which could define or illustrate its scope, including sample copies of such decisions, in order to enable the Committee to ascertain whether this provision is not used as a means of labour discipline within the meaning of the Convention.