Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Dominican Republic (Ratification: 1958)

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1992, Publication: 79th ILC session (1992)

A Government representative, the Secretary of State for Labour, praised the work of the Committee of Experts which through its comments enabled member States to make the changes and amendments necessary to bring national legislation into conformity with international standards. He indicated that the new Labour Code was promulgated on 29 May 1992. This Labour Code was the result of a tripartite dialogue between Government, workers and employers which made it possible to reach a consensus on the 740 articles of the draft Code presented to the national Congress.

The provisions of this Code were to be applied not only to urban industry but also to agricultural undertakings and agro-industry, thus eliminating the previous distinction made in the Labour Code of 1951. The Labour Code contained provisions concerning the following: prohibition of forced labour, the obligation to pay workers wages in cash and not in the form of vouchers or other payments, and the prohibition of employment of children under the age of 14 years. With respect to freedom of association, the new Code recognised the protection of immunity for the founders of trade unions, its leaders and negotiators of collective agreements. Furthermore, the Code included the concept of essential services consistent with the jurisprudence of the Committee of Experts and guaranteed the right to strike by repealing penal sanctions for workers participating in illegal strikes, by reducing the percentage necessary to declare a strike and by permitting strikes not only for economic disputes but also disputes of interests. In this manner the Dominican Republic has harmonised its legislation with ratified Conventions.

As regards Convention No. 105, the General Directorate of Migration continued its work of regularisation of the status of Haitian nationals, especially of those engaged as sugar-cane cutters. He stated that presently 37,765 Haitians were engaged in temporary work for the sugar-cane harvest and processing. Furthermore, 36,180 residents' permits were granted to Haitians living in the country.

Decree No. 233/91 was no longer being applied and the General Directorate of Migration had recommenced the work of regularisation called for under Decree No. 417/90. Furthermore, given the events taking place in Haiti since October 1991 and the decision of the Organization of American States to isolate the de facto Government of Haiti, the Dominican Republic found itself blocked from reaching an agreement for the hiring of sugar-cane workers with the present Haitian authorities. As a result, for the sugar-cane harvest of 1991-92 hiring had been limited to Haitian nationals residing in the country and those who had voluntarily crossed the border.

As concerns the protection by the competent authority of the rights and freedoms of workers, the speaker pointed out that various measures had been adopted: (a) an agreement between the State Sugar Board (CEA) and the Federation of Sugar-Growers and various trade unions which associated workers' organisations in the weighing of cane and provided measures to ensure the avoidance of commercial falsification; (b) the continuous and permanent presence of labour inspectors in sugar-cane fields both in the plantations of the State Sugar Board and in the private sector; (c) the recognition of new trade unions in the sugar-cane industry both with respect to sugar-cane cutters and weighers in various plantations; (d) the continuation of social programmes undertaken by the State Sugar Board; and (e) the application of sanctions for employers who have violated the Labour Code and other labour standards as well as the registration of violations noted by the Labour Inspectorate.

Efforts were needed in all sectors and all necessary measures would be taken to give effect to this Convention.

Finally, with respect to the protection of wages, according to Tariff 3/92 of December 1991 concluded by the National Wages Board (a tripartite body), the minimum monthly wage for workers in the sugar-cane industry who do not work on plantations had increased by 20 per cent. Moreover, the minimum wage of agricultural workers including sugar-cane workers had increased by 30 per cent. Furthermore, the State Sugar Board had increased the salary of sugar-cane harvesters in 1991-92 by 40 per cent. In order to improve the living and working conditions of sugar-cane workers, particularly as concerns harvesters, the State Sugar Board and the Federation of Sugar Growers provided, in its agreement with the trade unions, for the collaboration between sugar industries and trade unions for the creation of consumer cooperatives which would enable the workers to avoid any abuse attempted by small private merchants.

The Workers' members thanked the Government for the interesting and encouraging information which it provided. They recalled, however, that this case had been discussed for many years now and that, last year, the Office had undertaken a mediation mission.

With respect to the regularisation of the status of Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic, they had already noted progress in this regard last year as a result of the adoption of Decree No. 417/90. This year's report of the Committee of Experts, however, had also referred to Decree No. 233/91 concerning the repatriation of foreign workers. This Decree had been implemented in an indiscriminate manner and affected not only men and women of all ages, but also persons born in the Dominican Republic, whether or not in the possession of a resident's permit. Decree No. 233/91 had been applied, in many cases, by means of round-ups in violation of human and employment-related rights. The application of this Decree in fact impeded the process of regularisation which was being implemented under Decree No. 417/90. There were, therefore, two contradictory policies. They urged the Government to take every measure to end this contradiction by ensuring a global policy, affirmed at the highest level, to ensure the application of the relevant standards.

As concerns the hiring procedure for Haitian workers, they understood that the Government of the Dominican Republic had not yet been able to reach an agreement with the Haitian Government. But even in the absence of an intergovernmental agreement, there were measures which could be taken to ensure the application of resolution No. 23/90 concerning the use of intermediaries in the engagement of workers. Having noted the progress made in the adoption of the Labour Code, they added that it would be necessary for a copy of the Code to be communicated to the Office in order to enable the Committee of Experts to fully analyse the new measures with respect to the comments which had been made for many years now.

Finally, they noted the progress made concerning freedom of association but again urged the Government to communicate supplementary information in order to permit a determination of whether, in practice, the guarantee of freedom of association was truly respected. They concluded by stressing that practical action was necessary to ensure meaningful improvement in working conditions and the living conditions of workers in the Dominican Republic, particularly with respect to the sugar-cane workers.

The Employers' members recalled that this case had been a problem for ten years and recalled that in 1983 a Commission of Inquiry had presented a report containing a number of recommendations to be implemented in order to ensure the full application of the Convention. They noted that the mediation mission undertaken in 1991 had resulted in a series of administrative and legislative improvements. Some problems still remained, however, and certain points needed to be clarified.

They recalled that Decree No. 417/90 concerning the regularisation of Haitian nationals affected over 100,000 workers, including Haitians born in the Dominican Republic. This Decree provided the framework, but many texts and detailed regulations would need to be drafted to ensure its effective implementation. They drew attention to Decree No. 233/91 which permitted the repatriation of foreign workers under 16 years of age. The older workers in question had, in many cases, been living and working in the Dominican Republic for decades. Furthermore, in some cases this repatriation was carried out forcibly. They noted the contradiction between these two Decrees and requested the Government to clarify its previous statement by indicating which Decree was no longer in force.

Secondly, they stressed the need to further regularise and control the hiring procedure. They recalled that the draft legislation reviewed in 1991 had made many improvements in the hiring procedure, but stressed that the practical implementation of these was essential. New hiring systems were to be introduced for the 1991-92 sugar-cane harvest. They regretted that there had still been no agreement reached with the Government of Haiti and requested the Government of the Dominican Republic to indicate the methods and procedures presently being used for hiring and the number of persons involved.

Finally, they requested the Government representative to submit in writing to the Office all the information they had provided verbally, including replies to all the questions raised in the Committee of Experts' report. They stressed the need for further information on legislative provisions which had been adopted and on their practical implementation, as well as on supervisory mechanisms. They expressed the hope that the progress which had been made would continue and that there would be no need to discuss this case in the future.

A Government member of Haiti, Minister of Social Affairs, noted that Decree No. 233/91 concerning repatriation had had a serious effect on many Haitians, and Haitian children of all ages born in the Dominican Republic, who had been sent over the border without any concern for human rights. The speaker pointed out that this was a very serious problem and largely concerned political difficulties between the two Governments. The Decree, which was adopted unilaterally by the Government of the Dominican Republic, had destabilised the Haitian Government by chasing over 30,000 Haitians and Haitian children into the country during the months of August and September, 1991. Many of them were put on trucks and sent to Haiti without any possibility of appeal. Furthermore, many of those repatriated had been born in the Dominican Republic and despite the guarantees of the Dominican Constitution had not been granted the same rights as Dominican nationals.

Despite the mediation mission undertaken by the ILO, this problem had not been resolved. The mission had first met in the Dominican Republic with high-level governmental officials and this was to be followed by a mission to Haiti. Haiti, however, never received a mission during the period between mid-August and 30 September when the coup d'état occurred. She stated that the Government of President Aristide had expressed every desire to resolve the conflict through dialogue.

Her Government hopes that all the legislative provisions which had been adopted in the Dominican Republic with a view towards resolving this problem would actually be applied. It expressed concern about the problem of the engagement of Haitian workers for the sugar-cane harvest and the difficult relations between trade unions and employers and Government. The speaker expressed the hope that ILO mediation would continue so that the problem of Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic could finally be resolved.

The Employers' members, by way of clarification, indicated that their earlier statement with regard to the fact that this case could only be discussed with one country reflected their concern that no reports had been received from the Haitian Government concerning the application of Conventions Nos. 29 and 105. The absence of such information made the discussion of this case slightly unilateral. They recalled that while the Haitian Government often made accusations, the case being discussed today concerned their own population and, in this respect, it too had responsibility to ensure their protection. They had often wondered if the Haitian Government was sufficiently cooperative in this regard. In any event, there was no agreement between the two Governments and this could not be considered the fault of only one of the parties. They urged the Haitian Government to submit a written report so that all views of the situation could be examined.

The Workers' member of the Dominican Republic noted that her country had been called before this Committee for many years on a number of different cases but that unfortunately this year they were only discussing Convention No. 105.

With respect to the declaration made by the Secretary of State for Labour concerning the fundamental changes in the Labour Code, she pointed out that unlike what was said by the Government representative, the evolution in the legal and labour matters was the direct result not only of dialogue and consultation but also of the struggle undertaken by the trade union movement. This was the reason that new labour standards had been adopted which would permit the improvement of industrial relations between workers and employers in the Dominican Republic. She recalled, however, that the Committee on Freedom of Association had noted in its recommendation the difficulties caused by government acts with respect to the trade union activities of the Dominican Electricity Corporation Workers' Trade Union whose leaders had been taken into custody and denied the possibility of exercising trade union activities. The speaker expressed the hope that the Government would correctly apply the new Labour Code and that it would finally resolve the problem of the Electricity Corporation Workers' Trade Union and problems facing workers in the free trade zones.

As concerns Convention No. 105, she pointed out that the situation of workers in the Dominican Republic was regrettable but noted that, as indicated by the Secretary of State, due to various pressures, certain measures had been taken to resolve the situation. Nevertheless, if some progress has already been made, much still needed to be done in order to eradicate a long-existing practice. She expressed the hope that the new labour standards and international legislation would be respected and pointed out that the problems of labour protection for Haitian workers were the same for Dominican workers. As concerned the recognition of trade union activities, she pointed out that some progress had been made and that there was no discrimination in the recognition of trade unions in the sugar-cane industry. Though Haitian workers were members of existing trade unions, the problems referred to had occurred because of the seasonal nature of their work.

With respect to Decree No. 233/91 concerning the repatriation of Haitians, the speaker recognised that abuses had occurred in an indiscriminate and violent manner, but pointed out that this practice had now ended and that repatriation was taking place in a more orderly fashion.

Finally, she stated that, independently of the attempts being made to improve living conditions on the "bateyes", the level of wages for sugar-cane workers was very low, making survival very difficult. She pointed out that the minimum wage for sugar-cane workers had risen to 90 dollars while the cost of a food basket was over 300 dollars. She stated that the problem of forced labour was a national problem which had to be resolved along with the economic problems and expressed the hope that the standard of living would be raised for all workers in the country.

A Workers' member of Greece noted the interventions made by the Government of the Dominican Republic and indicated that the information provided by the Government of Haiti was indispensable to the understanding of the point of view of a neighbouring country whose nationals were often the victims of serious discrimination. He noted that there had been progress but that this progress was quite small. There was no longer the concern of the past for the gathering of workers on trucks and assassinations but rather now it was a question of violent round-ups and expulsions.

He recalled that once a country had ratified a Convention, it undertook to adopt the legislation necessary for its application. But more importantly, it also undertook to effectively ensure the respect of that Convention.

Under Decree No. 233/91 Haitian workers over 60 years of age were repatriated. He was shocked by the fact that a worker having lived and worked in a foreign country and contributed to its economy for years could be repatriated once having reached retirement age without any mention of a right to a pension or concern for whether this worker still had a home in the country of origin. Children under 16 years of age could also be repatriated but there was an absence of information on whether these children were alone, with their parents or born in the territory. The speaker disagreed with the position that every country had the right to expel a foreigner living and working in a territory for an entire lifetime. In his opinion, such a country had the responsibility to provide decent living conditions, even until death in the case of a retired worker. As concerns the children of migrant workers born in the territory, the Government had the same obligations to them as it did to its nationals. After the Second World War, thanks to the action of the trade union movement, migrant workers who were expelled from industrialised countries were granted the same rights as the nationals. National trade unions would certainly react in the same fashion against similar discrimination now, at the end of the twentieth century.

With respect to the increase in wages, he asked the Government to provide further information on the inflation rate in the country and the real purchasing power gained by workers with such a wage increase. As concerns housing of sugar-cane workers by the State Sugar Board, could it indicate the cost of such housing to the worker and the percentage this represented of his salary. Finally, is there a workers' organisation for sugar-cane workers which was able to negotiate with the representatives of the State Sugar Board?

A Government member of Germany welcomed the progress which had been made by the Government but noted that there was still much to be done and many points which needed to be clarified. There appeared to be some divergence of opinion between the General Directorate of Migration and the Labour Department. The General Directorate of Migration appeared to be more powerful, so would the Government representative be able to implement in the Dominican Republic what he had stated orally today. He recalled in this regard that the Directorate of Migration had refused to receive the ILO meditation mission.

He noted the Government's statement concerning a decision by the Organisation of American States calling for minimum contacts with the Haitian Government until its return to democracy. Considering the human aspects of the problem, he wondered whether follow-up contacts between the two Governments could be made, if even at a technical level, and whether such contacts would be in violation of the decision reached by the Organisation of American States.

The Government representative stated that Decree No. 233/91, adopted 13 June 1991, had not been applied since August 1991. Thanks to the ILO's mediation mission, negotiations had been opened between the Government of President Aristides of Haiti and the Government of the Dominican Republic. The negotiations, which had been preceded by a visit of the mediation mission of the ILO to Haiti, had made possible a meeting between the Minister of Social Affairs of Haiti and the Secretary of State for Labour of the Dominican Republic. As a result, repatriations no longer take place under Decree No. 233/91 and the process of regularising the status of Haitians, conforming with Decree No. 417/90 of October 1990, has begun again.

Between December of 1991 and June 1992 - the sugar cane-cutting season - 22,000 workers had been contracted, the majority of which were Haitians: 14,000 were residents of the Dominican Republic and the remainder were frontier workers employed both on state-owned and private plantations.

The sugar-cane workers work under labour standards established in agreements negotiated by the trade unions. The weighing of cane cut by workers is now supervised by inspectors of the Ministry of Labour and inspectors designated by the trade unions. The trade unions were active and authoritative spokespersons recognised by both the Government and the private sugar-cane growers.

The speaker cited, among others, the cases of the trade unions of Corte, Alsa and Tiro de Caña, Porvenir sugar plantation, and San Pedro Macoris, which included amongst their spokespersons and member workers with Haitian nationality but with Dominican Republic identity documents. He reiterated that this reflected a guarantee of freedom of association, as there was no impediment to workers of Haitian nationality being members of trade unions.

Concerning the intervention by the Workers' member of Greece, the speaker emphasised that with the approval of the new Labour Code and measures taken in sugar-cane plantations, notable progress could be seen as compared to previous years. The wages had increased for workers in urban areas by 30 per cent and that for sugar-cane workers in rural areas by 40 per cent. Annual inflation for 1991 was 4 per cent. These wages were negotiated by a tripartite body and endorsed by the Ministry of Labour. Sugar-cane workers received free lodging as part of their employment.

As concerned the preoccupation relating to contacts with the Haitian authorities, the speaker recalled the decision of the Organisation of American States (OAS) to isolate the current Haitian authorities. Accordingly, his Government would not have any contacts with the current Haitian authorities. The Government of the Dominican Republic continued to recognise President Aristides, whose ambassador remained as designated representative in Santo Domingo. The coup d'état in Haiti was regrettable and the preoccupation expressed by the Minister of Social Affairs in Haiti about Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic was understandable.

In relation to the fact - mentioned by the Committee of Experts in its observation - that the Director of Migration had not received the ILO mediation mission, this official had been replaced. Six thousand persons (of a total of 1,000,000 Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic) had been repatriated and many of these persons had left voluntarily. Those who were repatriated were transported by bus and food had been distributed to persons affected.

The speaker stated in conclusion that thanks to the ILO mediation mission, Decree No. 233/91 had ceased to be applied; the programme of regularisation - in conformity with Decree No. 417/90 - of the status of Haitian workers resident in the Dominican Republic had been reinstated; temporary work permits had been issued to cane cutters and other temporary workers; and arrangements had been made for temporary residence permits for Haitian nationals residing in the country.

The speaker gave to the secretariat relevant documentation and the new Labour Code.

The Workers' members emphasised that the clarifications and responses provided by the Secretary of State showed how important the Committee of Experts' request for more precise information on the application of the various Decrees had been. As Decree No. 413/90 was still given effect according to the secretary, more information was needed on its application. The statement that Decree No. 233/91 had not been applied for months should also be confirmed by the Government in writing; examination of the new Labour Code should also be made possible.

The Employers' members declared themselves in full agreement with the Workers. Complete information should be confirmed and set out in writing, the new Labour Code should be communicated and responses should be made to the Committee of Experts so that, if necessary, the present Committee could examine the situation again next year.

The Committee noted the information given by the Government, in particular concerning the adoption and coming into force of the new Labour Code. It was satisfied to note the progress having been made on different points made in the Committee of Experts' report, but doubted whether such progress on the regulations on the status of Haitian workers was sufficient. It therefore urged the Government, in view of the fact that this matter had been pending for years, to regulate that status as soon as possible, in conformity with the relevant Conventions of the ILO and hoped to be able to conclude at its next session that this goal had been reached.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1991, Publication: 78th ILC session (1991)

The Government has communicated the following information:

I. Employment in plantations

1. As regards regularisation of the status of Haitians who have lived and worked in the country for a given period of time and the issue of identity papers to persons born in the Dominican Republic, under Decree No. 417/90 of 15 October 1990, a census has been taken of Haitian nationals established in the country. Census offices have been set up in the Department of Migration in the National District, San Pedro de Macoris, Azua, Elias Pi"na, Barathona, Samana y Pepillo Salcedo and in the provinces of Valverde, San Francisco de macoris, La Altragracia and Hato Mayor. Notices have been put out on the radio inviting the established Haitians to call at the migration offices.

The following figures were compiled on 10 May 1991:

Legalised Haitian nationals 36,109

Listed for registration 55,799

Registered for documents 28,289

Registered for children of Haitian nationals 9,252

Total 129,449

These figures were requested by the Committee of Experts in its 1991 observation. The numbers surveyed are nevertheless lower than the estimated number of Haitians living in the country, and it has to be noted that Haitian nationals are reluctant to come voluntarily to the migration offices for fear of deportation, most of them being illegal entrants. The census is still continuing.

For the 1990-91 sugar harvest, 14,597 workers were engaged, of whom 11,500 cane cutters worked in the eight state plantations: Rio Haina, Barahona, Ozama, Boca Chica, Quisquaya, Porvenir and Santa Fe.

So far, 9,252 Haitian descendants born in the Dominican Republic have been registered.

2. The regularisation of the hiring procedure and residence in the country of workers entering the country to work in the sugar-cane harvest. The freedom to work is laid down in article 8 of the Constitution. Decree No. 417/90 and the draft Labour Code reform provide for the freedom and right of the worker to freely choose and resign employment when considered necessary.

That draft provides as follows: all persons are free to undertake any occupation or activity or business allowed by law. There may be no hindrance to work or compulsion of a worker (point II). Section 148 of the draft provides: the Executive may allow foreign workers above the legal limit to be employed in agricultural-industrial undertakings for no more than a one-year period. This applies to workers by the day exclusively employed in the field. No intermediaries or military may interfere in the engagement, transport or recruitment of foreign workers in the sugar-cane industry. To be engaged, a worker must have a temporary residence permit as prescribed by law. In addition to the requirements of section 23 of the present Code, the worker's contract must include: (a) the worker's right to terminate the contract unilaterally; (b) full pay to be given to the worker personally, being not less than the legally established minimum wage; (c) the payment of any legally prescribed bonus, incentive, Christmas supplement or other right or benefit; (d) guarantees as to weighing the cane in the presence of the worker or his representative; (e) recognition of the right to freedom of association; (f) the worker's duty to undergo a medical examination and to protection of social security and labour laws; (g) conditions of board and loding, hygiene and adequate treatment for the worker and his family; and (h) drafting of the contract in Spanish and the language of the worker's country of origin.

No agreement has yet been reached with the Haitian Republic for the engagement of Haitian workers in cane-cutting. The Haitian Government has only recently taken office and contacts between the two governments are still at a preliminary stage. The Dominican authorities desire to continue improving relations between the two governments and hope agreement can soon be reached on various questions of mutual interest.

At the beginning of the present harvest, four frontier engagement poste were created for Haitian workers in Pedernales, Jimani, Elias Pi"na and Dajabon, where there are officials of health, Migration and the State Sugar Board (CEA). The engagement system should be further improved for the next harvest beginning in November 1991.

3. Protection by the competent authorities of the rights and freedoms of workers.

(a) in their policies the authorities insist on all workers engaged in cane-cutting being guaranteed freedom of transit. Thus, workers wishing to return to their own country have been repatriated to Haiti.

(b) Labour inspectors in sugar plantations ensure that labour legislation is applied equally to nationals and foreigners. Foreign nationality has been no obstacle to the formation of workers' unions or unions whose officers include Haitians. The Barahona Plantation Union of Workers and Employees formed on 22 July 1988 includes officers of Haitian nationality: Laguet Yan, Elfet Bonebil and Juan Francisco Molina Sigoyen; the Barahona Plantation Fraternal Union includes among its leaders Haitian, nationals Duanis Elis and Luis Yes; the Boca Chica Plantation Workers' Union includes among its leaders Haitian Luis Yanet; the Sugar Industry Independent Union Association of Electrical Technicians and Mechanics has Haitian Ibes Madelier as Complaints and Disputes Secretary; Haitian Gualen Mequilis is a number of the executive of the Ozama Plantation Union.

Further, the Barahona Plantation Cane-Cutters' Union, whose Secretary-General is Mr. Anis Shut Senfle, a Haitian, and which includes a majority of Haitian workers, was registered on 7 May 1991 as number 65/91.

Workers whose rights are infringed may have recourse to the Republic's courts, as proof of which several judgements have been given against CEA plantations in favour of Haitian national workers. One such was that of the Supreme Court of Justice at the instance of Federico Fransua, who is a Dominican national of Haitian origin, as the name shows.

(c) The creation in the bateyes of civil administration structures like those in other population centres is a problem of territoriality which must be resolved by the National Congress, involving as it does political and economic issues. Plantations and their bateyes are situated in political units called "municipalities", which have a justice of the peace with civil, penal and labour juristiction.

II. Living conditions in bateyes

The Government refers to Convention No. 95.

III. Other matters

As the Government indicated in its reply of 19 March 1991, Act No. 3143 of 11 December 1951 lays down penalties for not performing work which has been paid for, for which public work may be imposed. Act No. 224 of 1984 abolished public work in favour of the penalty of imprisonment, thus making forced public work in the country impossible.

To avoid any doubt, the draft Labour Code amends Act No.3143 of 11 December 1951 and section 214 is limited to the imposition of imprisonment for the non-payment by employers of agreed wages.

As regards the comment on sections 370, 373, 374, 678(16) and 679(3) of the present Labour Code, it is not clear that imprisonment involving compulsory labour may be imposed for participation in illegal strikes. The imprisonment which may be imposed for workers participating in strikes is from 15 days to six months, thus correctional in nature and in no circumstances involving public work.

In addition, see under Convention No. 95 the discussion which took place in the Committee on the application of Convention No. 105, as follows:

The Government has communicated the following information:

As concerns the comments made by the Independent Workers' Confederation in October 1990 referring to the application of this Convention, the Government refers to its responses to the Committee of Experts and the Committee on Freedom of Association, dated 19 March 1991.

A. Adoption of legislation giving effect to the Convention

The Government must point out that the Labour Code in force establishes various provisions for the protection of wages. In this regards, it expressly confirms:

(a) that wages shall be stipulated and paid entirely in legal currency (section 187);

(b) that wages must be paid on working days and at the workplace, at the latest one hour after the end of the payday (section 188);

(c) that wages cannot be paid for period longer than one month and, when the work is by hour or by day, the wages must be paid weekly (section 190);

(d) that wages cannot be seized, except one-third of the wages may be withheld for alimony payments (section 192);

(e) that deductions of wages shall not be made except for those authorised by the law, those concerning trade union dues with the worker's prior authorisation, advances on wages and those concerning credit granted by bank institutions, with the guarantee from the employer that in each case the deduction cannot exceed one-sixth of the worker's monthly wages (section 193);

(f) that a worker's credit for accrued wage is granted a general privilege as concerns the employer's real estate or personal property (section 197). Act No. 1226 of 1936 on the prohibition of seizing or handing over the appropriate amount to contractors when it is to the worker's prejudice, establishes an accelerated claims procedure which enables the worker to be paid directly with privilege as to the price of material and the transfer of the amount owed to the contractors.

All of these provisions have been reinforced in the draft Labour Code which expressly repeals the authority granted to the agricultural and agro-industrial enterprises to effect partial wage advances by means of delivering or handing out negotiable vouchers, wage tickets, chits or other things of this general order. As soon as the new Labour Code is adopted, this authority granted to the agricultural and agro-industrial enterprises in section 200 of the present Labour Code will disappear (sections 195-215 of the draft Code).

Also, the draft Labour Code expressly prohibits sanctions and seizures upon the amounts owed workers (section 213); this section was taken from Act 1226 of 15 December 1936 previously cited. This Act limits its scope of application to public works, but the draft Code extends its coverage to all works, whether they are public or private (section 213).

Furthermore, section 215 of the draft Code establishes that the worker's dependants have the right to obtain unpaid wages, exercise legal action or continue the lawsuit of a deceased worker, without, without having to be subjected to the common law rules of succession.

B. Protection of wages in sugar plantations

1. Measures to guarantee observance with respect to legal minimum wages

The circumstances occurring recently under which the minimum wage has been increased annually or over periods of less than one year indicate the concern and the interest which the Government gives to adjusting wages to correspond as much as possible to the increase in the cost of living.

It is fitting to recall that the minimum wage in agriculture is established for an eight-hour workday and is increased or decreased according to the hours worked; that the cane cuters have a flexible schedule and, as they are paid for their output or by the job, they are not strictly subjected to a fixed schedule or eight-hour workdays. A large majority of these workers work less than eight hours a day.

It is difficult to establish a fixed schedule for cane cutters because of the climate. There are hours of the day when the heat of the intense sun renders work difficult, exhausting the worker and diminishing his output. For this reason, agricultural workers accustom themselves and have always accustomed themselves to the establishment of flexible working hours and workdays and pay for output or by day, beginning the work at the hour the worker considers most convenient and the most advantageous. The cane cutters are the ones who fix the starting hour, duration and end of the day, as well as the days of rest, a necessary reality due to the reaons already explained.

2. Weighing the sugar cane

The special delegations installed in the sugar refineries for the application of section 2 of Decree No. 417/90 of 15 October 1990, integrated by the Labour Inspectorate in the service of the Secretariat of State for Labour, maintain permanent and continuous vigilance in order to ensure the introduction of the most effective measures to permit monitoring of the weighing of sugar can and to prevent deception in the weighing.

In this regard, various reports from the labour inspectors indicate that the situation has improved and the infractions which have been discovered have been denounced by the State Sugar Board, which has resulted in the cancellation of various weighings.

3. Articles 3 and 7 (payment of wages in cash and company stores)

As has been said previously, the draft Labour Code repeals section 200 of the Code presently in force and abolishes from its standards the authority which agricultural and agro-industrial enterprises presently possess to pay advance wages in the form of negotiable vouchers, wage tickets or chits. With the approval of the new Code, the practice in sugar refineries of paying agricultural workers in vouchers or chits will disappear completely.

In any event, relevant measures have already been adopted so that wage advances paid in the form of vouchers or chits can be carried out in the offices of the National Price Stabilisation Institute (JNESPRE), a partial solution for avoiding abusive deductions in private stores.

4. Article 14 (workers' information)

Faced with a majority of illiterate workers, the best possible means of informing workers is orally. The fact that a majority of Haitian agricultural workers to not speak Spanish makes the communication even more difficult.

Nevertheless, the labour inspectors who work in the refineries have been instructed to offer assistance of training to any worker who asks for it.

C. Enforcement

The Secretariat of State for Labour requested technical assistance for the strengthening and energising of the labour inspection services from the Inter-American Labour Advisory Administration (CIAT).

In addition a Government representative, the Secretary of State for Labour, reiterated the contents of the written information communicated by his Government on Conventions Nos. 95 and 105. He also gave some general indications concerning: the draft Labour Code, which had been sent to the ILO so that its compliance with ILO Conventions could be checked and which would soon be submitted to Parliament; the Decree of 14 May 1991 amending the regulations made under the Labour Code so as to give effect to the Convention (No.77) on the Medical Examination of Young Persons (Industry), 1946; and to Act No. 14/91 on the civil service and administrative career which recognises the freedom of association of public servants.

The speaker then referred to the various questions raised in the report of the Committee of Experts concerning the application of Convention No. 95 with regard to Haitian workers in the sugar industry. He indicated that the draft Labour Code expressly repealed the authority granted to the agricultural and agro-industrial enterprises to effect partial wage advances by means of delivering or handing out negotiable vouchers, wage tickets, chits or other things of this general order. As soon as the new Labour Code was adopted, this authority granted to the agricultural and agro-industrial enterprises in section 200 of the present Labour Code would disappear (sections 195-215 of the draft Code). This would help to stop unscrupulous persons exploiting the workers. While awaiting the adoption of the Code the Government had taken corrective measures, for instance, the management of certain major plantations had been required through a circular of 21 May 1991 to pay the tickets daily or at the latest within three days. Referring to the legal minimum wage, he indicated the difficulties stemming from remuneration by output in sugar cutting and the flexibility of working hours which was unavoidable in this kind of work. The Government had supplied information on this point concerning the pay records of the last harvest (1990-91) which showed that for an eight-hour workday the legal minimum wage for agriculture was being paid. He added that the minimum wage had been increased annually or over periods of less than one year, which showed the concern and the interest which the Government gave to adjusting wages to correspond as much as possible to the increase in the cost of living.

Referring to the weighing of sugar cane, he indicated that the special delegations installed in the sugar refineries for the application of section 2 of Decree No. 417/90 of 15 October 1990, integrated by the Labour Inspectorate in the service of the Secretariat of State for Labour, maintained permanent and continuous vigilance in order to ensure the introduction of the most effective measures to permit monitoring of the weighing of sugar cane and to prevent deception in the weighing. Various reports from the labour inspectors indicated that the situation had improved and the infractions which had been discovered had been denounced by the State Sugar Board, which had resulted in the cancellation of various weighings.

With respect to the agriculture diversification programmes and social welfare programmes, the Government described in its written reply the full programme of social development that the State Sugar Board is in the process of implementing in its own mills.

Concerning the information to workers on their wages, the speaker indicated that, given the fact that most workers are illiterate, the information needs to be transmitted orally. The fact that most of the Haitian workers do not speak Spanish makes this communication still more difficult, but the labour inspectors who are working on the sugar plantations have been trained to offer assistance to any workers who require it. He nevertheless considered that the best way to make the amount of wages known, and to defend them, was through the organisation of the workers themselves. Finally, he indicated that the Secretariat of State for Labour had requested technical assistance for the strengthening and energising of the labour inspection services from the Inter-American Labor Advisory Administration (CIAT), and that some of the proposals made in that project had already begun to be applied.

He then referred to the questions raised concerning the Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105). Under Decree No. 417/90, work had continued of taking a census and regularising the status of Haitians having lived and worked in the country for a certain time and of those born in the Dominican Republic. He informed the Committee on the statistics concerning the numbers of Haitian nationals whose position had been legalised or who were listed for registration and of children of Haitian nationals who had been registered. The situation was developing favourably but these measures took great efforts and thus required international cooperation.

Regarding the regularisation of the hiring procedure, he stressed that at present the Dominican authorities were prepared to strengthen relations with the Haitian Government with a view to reaching an agreement on the hiring of cane cutters. Meanwhile, the Government had proceeded to establish individual contracts, in Spanish and Creole, in conformity with the provisions of Decree No. 417/90; it had set up border posts for the hiring of labour and had strengthened the inspectorate, which met weekly with the Secretary of State for Labour to report on its work and the kind of offences noted. The State Sugar Board had laid off employees guilty of maltreatment of Haitian workers. The speaker stressed the demilitarisation of the hiring arrangements, a development which had been observed not only by the ILO direct contacts mission which had visited the country, but also the Generalized System of Preferences Subcommittee of the US Trade Policy Staff Committee. Furthermore, the round-ups had diminished and the Haitian nationality had not been an obstacle to the creation of cane-cutter trade unions or trade unions counting Haitian nationals among their leaders.

The Workers' members thanked the Secretary of State for Labour for his presence which allowed the present Committee to pursue the dialogue on the development of the situation of Haitian workers. The Committee has been discussing this case for many years and it was mentioned last year in a special paragraph in the general part of its report. Having compared the information given verbally and in writing this year with that discussed during previous years, it might be pointed out that there are some changes: a direct contacts mission visited the country; information, reports and replies have been furnished; Decree No. 417/90 referred to and examined in the Committee of Experts' report has been adopted, and the draft Labour Code has been elaborated with a view to improving the living and working conditions of workers. It is clear that the problem is vast and complex, which is shown by the Committee of Experts' comments, as well as by the replies and information in writing provided by the Government. The Workers' members made the following general statements: as regards observations made for many years by the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee, a certain progress might be noted concerning recruitment practices, the weighing, the minimun wage, the payment of wages, the workers' information and the living conditions. A lot of things still have to be done. The draft Labour Code still has to be adopted and the measures taken still have to be applied in practice: such as the application in practice of Decree No. 417/90 and, when it is adopted, the Labour Code; and ensuring an effective supervision with a view to achieving the elimination of negative practices, in particular in the field of recruitment and payment of wages. In this regard, the Workers' members would ask what penalties have been provided for and imposed upon those employers who, for example, continue to pay wages in the form of negotiable vouchers and what penalties are provided for in the draft Labour Code to ensure its application in practice. After having read the report of the Committee of Experts and that of the direct contacts mission, one should come to a conclusion that the working conditions in the country remain deplorable and, according to witnesses, the local police took the place of the military, and more important a number of children are recruited for plantation work. All this indicates that the situation remains difficult and there is still much to do. The Government itself indicates in the information in writing supplied to the Conference that the improvements envisaged, and in particular concerning the recruitment system, should be further developed for the next harvest beginning in November 1991. Recalling that the Committee of Experts noted in its observation the existence of problems that merit energetic and sustained action by the authorities, the Workers' members request the Government to undertake such action and to inform on measures taken and on their practical application in order to enable the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee to examine the development of the situation in the next year.

The Employers' members, noting that the present case is a very complicated one, recalled that since the Committee of Inquiry set up in 1983, the present Committee and the Committee of Inquiry have been dealing regularly with it and on many occasions expressed their grave concern. That is why they are particularly glad to hear the statements made by the Government representative who has given a very detailed, comprehensive, moderate and realistic report. The information provided by the Government representative, as well as that contained in the written reply, shows that there are new Decrees and new draft legislation. The Committee of Experts shall examine this detailed information, both verbal and in writing. The Employer' members observed, however, that according to the report of the direct contacts mission, to which reference is made in the Committee of Experts' report, certain progress has been made.

In relation to the application of Convention No. 95, the Employers' members, noting that the crux of the matter is the fair and guaranteed payment of the sugar-cane workers, recalled individual problems, such as the level of wages and the guarantee of minimum wage, the correct weighing of the sugar cane and the correct form of payment of wages. In their opinion, progress has been made as regards the time of payment of wages.

Concerning the application of Convention No. 105, the Employers' members pointed out that the question of the legal status and the general treatment of the Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic is a question of providing for humanitarian treatment in many aspects of life and recalled that these workers were often simply rounded up and forced to work. They consider it necessary that the State Sugar Board should improve its own practices. They also regretted that after such a long period of time there is still no agreement between the Government of Haiti and the Government of the Dominican Republic. The Employers' members considered it necessary that further steps should be taken and expressed the hope that the goodwill which is being demonstrated will help to transform the words into acts and the Government will communicate information on any progress made either in legislation or in practice.

The Government representative of Haiti indicated that his intervention would refer to the case of Haitian workers living in the Dominican Republic and the application of Conventions Nos. 95 and 105, and congratulated the Committee of Experts for its valuable and insightful observations and for its refined and detailed analysis of the question. The Haitian Government noted with satisfaction Decree No. 417/90 of 15 October 1990, which aimed to normalise the situation of Haitian citizens, to install special offices responsible for applying the employment contracts in the plantations and ensure their strict observation as well as the respect of human rights for Haitian workers. His Government trusted that this showed a clear willingness on behalf of the Government of the Dominican Republic to solve the problem. All of the reports received from the relevant departments in the Dominican Republic indicated, however, that in practice the situation of Haitian workers had not changed. The Haitian Government hoped that the situation would improve and to this end proposed that a mixed body of Haitian inspectors and ILO members be formed to supervise the practical application of Decree No. 417/90 and encourage enterprises in the sugar industry to change their attitudes and their customs with regard to Haitian agricultural workers.

The Worker's member of the United Kingdom stated that the detailed report given by the Government representative did show some positive aspects. The Employers' members were right saying that it was a complicated case which covers 20 pages of the Committee of Experts' report. There are also documents in the D-series and a very comprehensive report from the Government. Referring to the "special paragraph" procedure of 1989 and to that of "continued failure to implement" of 1990 concerning this case, the speaker pointed out that these positive procedures seem to have produced some effect on the Government. There are still many things that require investigation by the present Committee in future years on both of these Conventions, but there are also signs that the Government is making an attempt to bring the national legislation and practice into conformity with their provisions.

The Government representative of Venezuela stated that the intervention made by the Government representative of the Dominican Republic demonstrated that the Government had adopted important measures in the direction requested by the supervisory bodies. The Committee could be pleased with the recent evolution of the situation and should encourage the Government of the Dominican Republic to continue in this direction. She considered that the results obtained confirmed the positive and educational nature of the supervisory system and the importance of the supervisory system should be stressed.

The Government member of Germany stated that he was impressed, first of all, by the seriousness of the problem, and second, by the comprehensive information communicated by the Government in writing and verbally. Without going into the details, what is important is an open attitude, the self-criticism and the readiness to deal with these enourmous problems seriously. This case is a very encouraging example of the positive role which is played both by the Committee of Experts and by the present Committee in order to improve the situation of workers in a spirit of an ongoing dialogue with governments, as reflected in paragraph 13 of the Committee of Experts' report. With reference to the intervention of the Government member of Haiti, he considered it positive that the Committee of Experts and the present Committee have given the first impulse and impetus to a dialogue between the two Governments in the interests of the workers concerned.

The Workers' member of the Dominican Republic emphasised that, if the problems seemed to be improving, there still remained much to do in order to better the conditions of life and of work of Haitian workers. He stated that the trade union movement hoped that the draft Labour Code, which was being discussed at the tripartite level with the assistance of the ILO, and Decree No.417/90, as well as the efforts that had been made by the State Sugar Board (CEA), would contribute to the improvement of the situation for these workers. He considered that the ILO should continue to follow up on the situation in order to ensure full respect of human rights and trade union rights for Haitian workers.

The Employers' members, with reference to the intervention of the Government representative of Haiti, asked about the attitude of the Government of Haiti concerning the conclusion of an agreement with the Government of the Dominican Republic on the recruitment of Haitian works and recalled that the importance of the conclusion of such an agreement between the two Governments was revealed during the discussion at the Conference Committee in 1988.

The Government representative of the Dominican Republic expressed his thanks for the words of encouragement and appreciation received from the Workers', Employers' and Government members who had taken the floor during the debate. He stated that there was a lot to be accomplished, but emphasised the political will of his country to deal fully with these problems. Replying to the question of the Workers' members, he indicated that the draft Labour Code had amended the amount of sanctions for violation of the current standards because those set in the present Code dated from 1951 and were obsolete and could not guarantee strong sanctions. Regarding the protection of minors, he stated that, to strengthen protective measures, a programme of placement of youth labour had been set up in sugar-cane areas and that the repatriation of some had taken place. He also referred to a circular from the State Sugar Board (CEA) dated 9 May 1991 which contained instructions for the control in practice of the employment of minors and strong disciplinary measures against those infringing the provisions relating to child labour. He concluded by referring to the economic restrictions prevailing in his country and emphasised its determined and irrevocable will to face up to the problems raised. He trusted that international collaboration and ILO cooperation would help in finding solutions to the problems of Haitian and Dominican workers.

The Government representative of Haiti stated that this Government is waiting for the normalisation of the working conditions of Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic before any eventual agreements are envisaged.

The Government member of the United States expressed her Government's satisfaction with a significant amount of movement which had taken place in this case. She pointed out that her Government has followed the situation in the Dominican Republic with some interest and is encouraged by the progress that has been made, though there is much work to be done still. The speaker also indicated that certain trade preferences which might be awarded by her Government usually depend on whether the Government in question is providing workers with the basic rights and freedoms in conformity with ILO Conventions.

The Committee took note of the report of the Committee of Experts, the detailed information, both verbal and in writing, provided by the Government representative, and the views expressed in the wide-ranging discussion which took place at the meeting. The Committee took note of the fact that direct contacts have taken place in January 1991. It welcomed the reopening of the dialogue between the Dominican Republic and the supervisory bodies, as well as the progress that has been observed. However, the Committee remains extremely concerned about the situation of Haitian workers in the sugar-cane plantations in the Dominican Republic. The Committee noted with interest that a series of specific preliminary measures have already been undertaken to improve the situation, in particular by the preparation of a new Labour Code. However, the Committee deplored the fact that this progress has not yet made it possible to adapt national law and practice to meet all the requirements of Conventions Nos. 95 and 105, in respect of which there are still various divergencies. The Committee hoped that this Code can be adopted as soon as possible. The Committee noted with interest the existence of Decree No. 417/90 dated 15 October 1990 which in particular imposes a form of cooperation with the International Labour Office which should make it possible to see in the field that the promised improvements have taken place which are still awaited. The Committee invited the Government to strengthen necessary measures the application of which could be monitored. The Committee noted with concern the failure of efforts aimed at concluding an agreement with Haiti concerning recruitment. It expresses the strong hope that the Government will have recourse to the assistance of the ILO in order to renew its efforts so that such an agreement can be concluded, taking into account, inter alia, the comments of the supervisory bodies. The Committee trusts that the Government of the Dominican Republic will continue its efforts and will immediately, by means of energetic and sustained action, take the additional measures, in particular by adopting the new Labour Code in order to fully implement in law and in practice measures in response to the comments made by the supervisory bodies of the ILO.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1990, Publication: 77th ILC session (1990)

See under Convention No. 95, as follows:

A Government representative, the Secretary of State for Labour, stated that his Government had made great efforts to introduce substantial changes in the country's labour legislation, with the aim of guaranteeing the implementation of Conventions Nos. 95 and 105. He indicated that there were approximately 1 million Haitian cane cutters, 90 per cent of which were illegal workers. He went on to state that the numbers of migrant Haitian workers were growing constantly, because of job opportunities and the growth of activities in other sectors of the economy. This had enabled sugar workers to move into other branches of economic activity, where they enjoyed the same rights as Dominican nationals. During harvest season, about 5 per cent of the resident Haitian population was employed in the sugar industry, 2 per cent of which work in the state-owned factories. He insisted that both legal and illegal Haitian workers had the right to freedom of movement and to choose their employment. They were freely engaged and provided with adequate transport facilities. As dar as conditions of work in the state-owned bateyes were concerned, he confirmed that the State Sugar Board (CEA) had taken a number of administrative measures to guarantee a substantial wage increase. As a result of a decision by the CEA, the amount paid for each ton of cut cane had been increased by 12 pesos. Average daily output per picker was 2 tons. Daily pay of 24 pesos was higher than the 16.50 pesos prescribed as the statutory minimum wage for the agricultural sector under Resolution No. 1 of 1989. There was constant monitoring to ensure that the cane was weighed correctly. One measures had been taken to guarantee full payment of wages in cash; to set an eight-hour day and a 48-hour work week; and to apply health and safety standards prescribed by Regulation No. 807. Labourers (braceros) were also covered by the existing social security system. Other social assistance and protection programmes for sugar-cane workers included accommodation, diversification of agricultural activities, setting up of low-cost shopping facilities and food distribution. The speaker believed that the results of those programmes had been ignored by those intent on carrying out a campaign to discredit his country which, on humanitarian grounds, allowed Haitian workers to enter, work and reside freely and to enjoy the same rights as Dominican workers.

The Workers' member of the Dominican Republic stated that this organisation, the Autonomous Labour Federation (La Confederacioon Autoonoma Sindical Clasista) was engaged in a long-standing struggle to ensure the implementation of the Conventions, which had great importance for both Haitian and Dominican workers. He added that, as a result of such efforts, there had been a siginificant reduction in the systematic violation of the provisions of those instruments, as had been the case in the past. There were now only isolated cases. His Federtation worked closely with the Socio-cultural Movement of Haitian Workers, in order to make workers more aware of their rights.

The Workers' member of Greece emphasised that dialogue was an appropriate means for resolving problems, provided that it was not a dialogue of the deaf. He did not appreciate the term "illegal workers" which the Government representative had used, since in his view work was not an illegal activity; the term "clandestine workers" would be more suitable. The Government representative's statement led one to believe that acceptance of Haitian workers constituted a philanthropic act on the part of the Dominican Republic. It was, in fact, a way of enabling the country to cope with its manpower problems. The speaker went on to pose three questions to the Government representative. The first concerned steps being taken by the Government to regularise the situation of Haitian workers. The second was whether or not penalties were imposed on those employers or state companies employing clandestine workers; in the event that there were none, he wanted to know whether the Government intended to take measures in this regard. Finally, he asked for an explanation of the reasons for which the ILO mission planned for 1989 had been cancelled.

The Workers' member of the United Kingdom stated that similar statements had been made to the present Committee by the Government representative from the Dominican Republic for several years now, yet problems remained. He had difficulty in believing that the Government was referring to the same case as himself. Yet it was an outstanding case which deserved not only special attention but also special action. The issue at stake was the treatment of sugar workers still largely recruited from Haiti. Although slavery had been abolished in the Dominican Republic over 100 years ago, Haitians working in the country on state sugar plantations were still delivered to that work at gunpoint and those were Government-run plantations. They were forcibly kept there, living in appalling conditions, and the overseers of this forced labour were Government officials. He was not talking about some distant past but about last year. The massive human rights violations which took place on these plantations had been recorded in United Nations documents and reports by human rights organisations, the ILO and the press. The Governments' cancellation of the planned ILO mission to verify working conditions during the 1989-90 sugar harvest, on the grounds of "its disagreements with the orientation of the mission" was in his his view indicative of the Government's opposition to having an on-the-spot verification of what was taking place. As pointed out in the report of the Committee of Experts, there had been a total failure to do anything at all about the measures requested by the ILO and by this Committee. Sugar-importing countries did bear some responsibility for forced labour of adults and children used on sugar plantations during the harvest. In this connection, he pointed out that the European Community bought sugar only from countries which were parties to the 1973 Lomoe Convention. There was, however, no question of the Dominican Republic fulfilling the conditions under that Convention. That might change if all countries refused to buy sugar produced in such circumstances. The way sugar was produced in the Dominican Republic might rot the fabric of Dominican society, and failure of this Committee to maintain standards would rot the basis of its work, so that finally, the ILO's credibility would suffer.

The Government member of Haiti, Minister of Social Affairs, said she had listened very attentively to the statement of the Minister of Labour of the Dominican Republic. She herself had visited the Dominican sugar plantations bateyes on many occasions, including at the beginning of February 1990. Unfortunately, what she had seen and heard during this visit did not correspond to conditions described by the Government representative. She stressed that the Dominican Republic should respect the Conventions it had ratified and, in particular, authorise an ILO mission to carry out an on-the-spot investigation as previously agreed.

The Workers' member of the United States stated that the information supplied by the Government had clearly been unsatisfactory. He considered the case to be one of the most serious ever to come before this Committee. The basic problems were many and long-standing but, despite considerable technical assistance from the ILO, no improvements had been introduced into the working conditions of plantation workers. During the last few years this Committee had found it necessary to include a special paragraph in its report on the working and living conditions of Haitian cane-cutters in the Dominican Republic, which could only be described as deplorable, notwithstanding the recommendations of an ILO Commission of Inquiry made as far back as 1983. The actual situation with respect to Convention No. 105 was summed up quite clearly in the concluding paragraphs of the report of the Committee of Experts where it stressed that "there had been no progress either in terms of legislation or practice, on essential points raised over a number of years by the Commission of Inquiry, the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee".

The Workers' members stated that for many years, the Committee had been discussing, in pratically the same terms, Conventions Nos. 95 and 105 and the appalling sitation which affected a significant category of workers. The problems are well-known and remained unresolved. They pointed out that there was a large gap between the intentions stated by the Government and the real situation, in which there had been no improvement. They were of the view that, each year, when called before the Committee, the Government adopted the same strategy of making solemn declarations and promising future improvements, only to forget its promises afterwards. Since the last Conference, no information had been submitted for review by the Committee of Experts. No information had been given with respect to basic requirements of Convention No. 95 concerning: the prohibition of payment of salaries in the form of vouchers; the direct payment to workers; the general prohibition on free disposal by workers of their wages; the assignment of wages; the protection of wages in plantations, the control of the weighing of the cane; payment in kind; the operation of company stores; and the deferred payment of part of the salary. According to the Government, notices dealing with those issues had been circulated and the problems had been resolved. However, the Committee of Experts had made it known that those notices were neither brought to the attention of the workers nor were they applied. Notwithstanding the Government's promise to the Committee, no detailed labour inspection reports on plantations had been submitted.

With regard to Convention No. 105, the Committee of Experts called attention to the fact that problems raised in previous reports persisted and, indeed, seemed to have worsened. The statement made by some Workers' members confirmed this situation, as did official reports and clippings from national and international newspapers, which described the dramatic working conditions of sugar cane plantation workers. No information had been received on the question of the legal status of Haitians living in the Dominican Republic and on the regularisation of procedures governing their employment.

The Workers' members recalled that in 1989 this Committee had stressed the need for special efforts whereby the ILO could monitor the situation and verify on-the-spot the extent to which the promised improvements had been made. The Committee of Experts pointed out that the Government had cancelled this mission which was supposed to have been carried out. Despite the 1983 Commission of Inquiry, and the 1988 direct contacts mission, it was still not possible to determine whether or not real progress had been made. The Committee of Experts had informed the Government of the need to take concrete measures to redress the situation and also pointed out that this case had already been dealt with in several special paragraphs of its report. Under the circumstances, the Workers' members asked that the case of the Dominican Republic be included in the part of the report of the Committee relating to continued failure to implement, in relation to the application of Conventions Nos. 95 and 105.

The Workers' member of El Salvador noted with regret that the Government representatives did not transmit to their governments the recommendations of the ILO. He added that failure to comply with the provisions of the Conventions could lead to social injustice and expressed great dissatisfaction over the fact that the Governments of the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Colombia and many other countries were violating these instruments. He restated his earlier call for economic and political sanctions to be imposed on those governments which did not fulfil their obligations, so as to guarantee peace and social justice for all workers.

The Employers' members expressed their disappointment with the statement of the Government representative, who had not replied on several important points and had not adopted a sufficiently clear position. The case in question concerned outstanding problems which had come before the present Committee on many occasions and which had been the subject of the report of a Commission of Inquiry in 1983, as well as direct contacts. Moreover, in each of the three previous years the case had figured in a special paragraph in the report of the present Committee. Moreover, a report, drafted by Mr. Pons commissioned by the State Sugar Board (CEA) had been published in 1986. Its results basically corresponded with the findings of the Commission of Inquiry, the observations of the Committee of Experts and the repeated recommendations of this Committee. The Employers' members stated that this case particularly concerned the legal status of Haitians working on sugar plantations in the Dominican Republic and their fair remuneration. Today, the Government delegate had said that Haitian and Dominican workers were treated in the same way. Should this be the case, then the violation under discussion also concerned Dominican workers because they were also covered by Conventions Nos. 95 and 105. For many years, the Government had been making unfulfilled promises, and had not even suggested reports for examination by the Committee of Experts the Employers' members stated that they would refer to only a few of the many issues raised. As far as payment of inadequate salary was concerned, they noted that there was a legal minimum wage related to the duration of work, whereas the sugar industry paid piece rates based on tons of cane cut. There were doubts as to whether, under such a system, sugar workers actually received a minimum wage and whether instructions contained in circulars issued by the CEA were known to everyone and applied in practice. All this could be determined only if the CEA as well as the state inspection service provided accurate information. One was left with the impression that the CEA operated as "a State within a State" with its own rules and laws. the Government should carry out checks since it was responsible for ensuring compliance with Conventions. Similar doubts existed as regarded the correct amount of sugar cane cut and the adequate involvement of the workers in this process. Here again, the reports of the labour inspection servicer were lacking. Precise information had been requested on payment of wages, the use of vouchers and the time at which wages are paid. The Government had provided no written evidence on any of these matters, although announced plans should have been put into effect and described in a proper report. The Employers' members noted that in the case in question here was a link between Conventions Nos. 95 and 105. That was due to the dubious manpower "procurement" methods by which Haitians were "recruited" to work on sugar plantations. There had been serious cases of using forced labour, with the complicity of State authorities, namely the police and army. Urgent steps were needed to deal with such a situation. The remarks of the Government representative that Haitian workers should be pleased to be allowed to work in the Dominican Republic, even though their status was illegal, were unacceptable. The Government could not employ Haitian labour on State plantations and at the same time do nothing to change their illegal status. Their status should be rectified and the State should ensure that rights of these workers were protected. All States had a duty to protect and guarantee minimum standards to all those living in the country for a certain period of time. Recruitment procedures should be properly regulated and an interstate agreement between the Dominican Republic and Haiti should be concluded. Both States should undertake sustained efforts along these lines.

As regards outstanding requests as well as the shortcomings noted, this Committee had again considered last year that a mission might be useful. The fact that this mission had been cancelled at the request of the Government showed a lack of goodwill towards making any real changes. The Employers' members considered that there was a marked contradiction between repeated promises made to the present Committee and the actual situation. They therefore thought that this case should be given particular attention in the report. A special paragraph should be adopted, since it was evident that no aspect of the situation had improved, that conditions remained the same and had even deteriorated. They agreed with the Workers' members that the continued failure to implement the two Conventions should be noted in the appropriate part of the report. The Government should expedite a report containing concrete information on all the points so that the Committee of Experts and this Committee would be in a position to see whether there had been progress.

The Government representative reaffirmed that, now more than ever, human rights were respected in his country. He said that it was difficult to prevent people crossing the border and that the Haitians entered Santo Domingo in search of a better life. They were neither deported nor coerced, particularly since the armed forces were no longer associated with matters concerning the employment of Haitian workers. He called on the ILO to provide assistance in carrying out a census of the Haitian workers, since it was difficult to determine their actual number. Referring to the text of resolution No. 1 of October 1989 concerning the revision of statutory minimum wages, he stated that in his country there was machinery enabling the implementation of all those provisions. Notwithstanding the many difficulties which his country faced as a developing country, the aim of the Government was to resolve the problems relating to the presence of Haitian workers. On the question of allowing an ILO mission to visit his country, the Government representative stated that the final decision rested with the President of the Republic.

The Workers' member of Benin said that the Government representative had evaded the issue, failing to provide clear explanations. He asked the Government representative to authorise a fact-finding mission to enter the country to assess the progress that had allegedly been made.

The Workers' members expressed their disappointment over statements made by the Government representative which did not reply to the questions posed. They believed that the most constructive approach would be to include the case in the appropriate part of the report concerning cases of continued failure to implement Conventions.

The Employers' members stated that they had learnt nothing new from the second statement made by the Government representative, and that they had only been presented with confusing data on minimum wages. They had expected a written report with more precise information. With respect to the request by the Government representative for Office assistance to carry out a consensus of Haitian workers, they wondered whether the Office could provide such services, and noted that the role of the Office was to assist in matters pertaining to the application of Conventions. They recalled that for some time this Committee had been noting that, as regards certain basic issues, the provisions of Conventions Nos. 95 and 105 were not being duly respected. That had been mentioned in a special paragraph of its report and it was in fact a case of long-standing violation of these instruments. They expressed the hope that promises made by the Government - which were similar to those made by its predecessors - would result in real, substantial and noticeable changes.

The Committee noted the information supplied by the Government on the protection of wages and the position of Haitian and other workers in the sugar-cane industry. It recalled that the same matters had been discussed at earlier sessions, up to the 76th Session of the International Labour Conference, when the Committee had considered that special efforts were called for to ensure the application of the Conventions in both legislation and practice, so that the ILO could, as from the 1989-90 harvest, verify the situation and ascertain on the spot that improvements which had been promised, but were still awaited, had in fact been made. It deeply deplored the fact that the Government had not supplied the required indications on necessary legislative and practical measures - which, according to the Government, had already or would be taken - and that the Government did not co-operate with the ILO in this regard since it had cancelled a mission of representatives of the Director-General due to visit the Dominican Republic and Haiti following the last Conference. The Committee therefore had to conclude that the information supplied by the Government did not add substantially to what the Committee had heard at its earlier sessions.

The Committee took note of this case with extreme concern and decided to mention it in the General Part of its Report under the heading "Continued failure to implement" as one in which there had been continued failure over several years to eliminate serious deficiencies in the application of ratified Conventions which the Committee had previously discussed.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1989, Publication: 76th ILC session (1989)

The Government has communicated the following information:

No form of forced or compulsory labour is used in the Dominican Republic. The national authorities maintain strict compliance with the standards set forth in this Convention and with the recommendations made by the ILO's Commission of Inquiry in its 1983 report, as well as the observations made by the Committee of Experts in 1988 and 1989. This compliance maintained by the authorities explains why no measures involving imprisonment and/or forced or compulsory labour exist.

In the labour sphere, no recourse is had to this form of work as a method of mobilisation and utilisation of national or foreign labourers in order to foster the economy in the sugar plantations and refineries of the CEA, as was previously alleged by the Central Unitaria de Trabajadores (CUT). With regard to the importation of Haitian labourers for work in the sugar cane harvest (cutting and collection of the sugar-cane) in government-owned sugar mills, the collective agreements between the Governments of Haiti and the Dominican Republic for the recruitment of Haitian workers have not been renewed. These agreements were suspended because of the difficult socio-political situation which has emerged in that country. Haitian workers have not been hired under the bilateral agreements since the fall of the Duvalier regime in 1985. Both Governments are presently involved in a complete revision of the procedures and of the numbers of jobs for Haitian workers in order to re-establish these agreements as soon as possible, based on the best living and working conditions for these workers on Dominican territory and in the most favourable terms for both States. Any new developments on this matter will be communicated to the ILO. The present forms of recruitment of Haitian workers for sugar plantations in 1988-89 do not include, in any instance, round-ups of these workers legally or illegally resident in the Dominican Republic with the complicity of the national authorities, in order to hand them over, for payment, to the state sugar refineries.

Neither forced labour nor any form of discrimination exists in the Dominican Republic against Haitian workers engaged in agricultural work, cutting and collecting of sugar-cane at the CEA plantations and refineries, where these foreigners enjoy the same rights and privileges under the labour legislation as Dominican workers employed in similar work. Clandestine work by Haitian nationals who regularly, and in increasing numbers, cross the Dominican/Haitian border illegally does, however, exist to a large degree. These workers are used by private employers in various agricultural and livestock activities whence they move later to the informal rural and urban sectors, to domestic work and to the construction industry in the large cities of the country. The authorities are studying possible measures, to be adopted in the near future, to regulate recruitment and contracting, and the work of foreigners resident in the country, in particular, to reduce illegal - trafficking of Haitian workers "ambastilles" to a minimum. These measures would also regulate the inadequate living and working conditions of these workers offered to them by private employers who benefit considerably from the use of practices which fall outside the labour law. In fact, the living and working conditions provided by private employers to illegal immigrant Haitian workers are less advantageous and humane than those granted to workers in the sugar plantations and refineries of the CEA.

In recent years (1987 and 1988), the CEA has undergone a dynamic process of diversifying its production into the agricultural and livestock subsectors, giving emphasis to the agroindustrialisation of the duty-free zones. The CEA has not been able to achieve full "Dominicanisation" of the sugar plantations in this process despite the great efforts made by its administration and the plan conceived to attract Dominican and resident Haitian agricultural workers, and to issue to the latter the full legal and social status similar to that enjoyed by Dominicans. Because of this, and in the absence of Haitian agricultural workers being brought in, the present harvest (1988-89) has been affected by a considerable lack of pickers which has resulted in a significant delay in the work of cutting and collecting sugar-cane, as well as the task of grinding it, with the subsequent loss of millions of pesos for the state sugar trading centre.

Presently, no violation of the labour law has been registered against the CEA as concerns its sugar plantations and refineries nor do they offer sub-human conditions, particularly with regard to the work-day and wages. For the cutting and collecting of sugar-cane, Haitian and Dominican agricultural workers do not work for more than the eight hours a day allowed by agreement or by statute. The object of misunderstanding is that the said workers voluntarily vary their hours of starting and stopping work in order to take advantage of the hours of moonlight, early morning, dusk, etc. Earned wages are higher than those offered in Dominican agriculture due to the increase accorded for each ton of sugar-cane cut and collected. The considerable increase in income guarantees better living conditions. The presence of armed guards does not imply repression (such as the completion of excessively long workdays) but rather exists for the protection of human and material resources in the state-owned work centres.

Likewise, although Conventions Nos. 97 and 143 and Recommendations Nos. 86 and 151 (concerning migrant workers) have not been notified by the Dominicain Republic, their provisions are observed so as to give full effect to the recommendations of the 1983 Commission of Inquiry found in paragraphs 516, 522, 526 and 527 of its report.

With reference to the provision of the Third Part of the Labour Code, it is reiterated that labour laws in the Dominican Republic are of a territorial nature and apply to Dominicans and foreigners without distinction.

The methods for recruitment established in the absence of agreements between the Governments of Haiti and the Dominican Republic for the hiring of Haitian agricultural workers, consist of contacts and personal interviews between the agricultural workers and the authorised representatives of the CEA, either in their place of residence in the Dominican territory, or in some cases when workers appear in person at branches of the state sugar enterprise searching for work at the time of the sugar harvest. In both cases, the Haitian agricultural workers showed particular interest in the cutting and pulling of sugar-cane, accepting the actual living conditions and work available in the CEA's plantations and refineries. Moreover, the CEA provides all possible facilities so that the recruited workers can be adequately transported from their places of residence around the country to their workplaces.

In compliance with the recommendation in paragraph 544 of the 1983 report of the Commission of Inquiry, the State Secretariat for Labour has intensified its inspection services in the sugar plantations and refineries, both state-owned respect for the rights of both national and foreign workers employed in agricultural work or on plantations for the cutting and collection of sugar-cane. In due time reports will be forwarded on the results of the system of regular visits to both the state and private sugar plantations and refineries, in order to improve the effectiveness of these services and on the complaints and irregularities investigated and sanctions imposed in cases of violations of agricultural workers' rights.

The CEA regularly uses individual contracts as a means for recruiting Haitian agricultural workers. Each contract contains all the contractual conditions and benefits which are enjoyed by Dominican workers hired also on an individual basis.

The Government is carefully considering the recommendations made by the Commission of Inquiry in 1983 in order to apply fully this Convention and others ratified by our country, as concerns the employment of Haitian workers in Dominican Republic sugar plantations, in order to take and implement all administrative and legislative measures that may be necessary.

The CGT, in its communications of 3 and 31 January 1989, made allegations concerning the violation of some provisions of this Convention. With regard to the questions raised in these accusations, the Government refers to the contents of its report recently sent to the ILO.

Article 1(c) of the Convention Despite the existence of Act No. 3143 of 11 December 1951, amended by Act No. 5224 of 1959, on work paid for but not done, this does not imply that it is a means of labour discipline in practice since this Act has fallen into disuse. In order to repeal the application of Act No. 3143 as a practical measure, the authorities have determined ways of resolving labour conflicts, arising under this Act, through administrative or judicial means.

Article 1(d) The provisions in the Labour Code which contemplate punishment by means of sentences of imprisonment involving compulsory labour for participation in strikes have, in practice, been completely abolished, now that the right to strike is guaranteed by law and by the authorities. The Government has, however, invoked some provisions of the Labour Code (sections 370, 373 and 378) in order to protect public order. human life and private property. The Government is promoting both the repeal of some of these provisions and possible amendments to others in order to ensure that the laws are in conformity with the Conventions.

As was expressed in earlier reports, the authorities are reevaluating possible reforms to the Labour Code in order to bring national legislation into conformity with the Convention by providing that no form of forced labour may be imposed as a labour disciplinary measure. Furthermore, the Government's willingness to ensure the adoption of all measures necessary to give full effect to the provisions of the Convention remains.

In addition a Government representative of the Dominican Republic, the Secretary of Labour. stated that there had been a lack of labour inspectors and a budget deficit in the State Secretariat of Labour; 60 posts for labour inspectors had now been created in order to overcome these shortcomings. These labour inspectors were employed under sections 390 and 400 of the Labour Code in order to effectively oversee the application of the labour provisions in that Code, especially in sugar mills under the administration of the State and on individual private plantations. These inspectors were to ensure, inter alia, that the minimum wage be paid to agricultural workers, and that the measures dictated by the State Sugar Board (CEA) in an effort to improve the situation of Dominican and Haitian labourers were being taken, and in particular that workers be paid wage bonuses before the end of the harvest. Other types of measures had been taken as well, such as mechanising the harvesting of cane and having the cut cane weighed in the presence of the cane cutter who was then given chits (showing the number of the cart, the name of the cutter, the date and the exact weight of the cut cane) as proof of the work performed. These labourers also benefited from having products available on sale at reasonable prices, social assistance and medicines. All of these measures were designed to increase the wage earned by workers on sugar cane plantations. The Government representative gave the exact number of weighers at each mill. He also stated that in case of difficulties in the weighing process, the chief weigher could intervene to try to resolve the problem; all the same, inspectors had shown that it was difficult to cheat the cane cutters, since they had garnered great experience over many years and knew the precise weight of cut cane. Up to now, 12 weighers had been dismissed for committing irregularities in carrying out their duties; this indicated that the circulars issued by the CEA were being observed in practice.

With regard to the labourers' housing, the labour inspectors had found that in plantations administered by the State, there were adequate sanitary facilities, works stores and childcare centres. It was important to note that the works stores, previously under private ownership, which had lent itself to speculation, were owned by the State, and offered prices for food and medicines which were within the reach of the workers and which were controlled by the Government Price Stabilisation Institute. The labour inspectors had also been asked to make a detailed report on the situation of agricultural workers on plantations with a view to improving the situation of workers of Dominican Republic and Haitian origin who were resident in the country. Circular No. 789 of 20 October 1988 contained provisions and recommendations to plantation administrators in relation to contracting Dominican Republic and Haitian manpower and in connection with the sugar cane harvest.

In regard to wages, the Government representative explained that there was a policy of wage bonuses, and that no plantation worker received a wage below the level of the statutory minimum wage. Nor were wages deferred, they were instead paid directly to the worker. Circular No. 111 of 11 November 1988 set forth provisions on wages: the price for sugar-cane was 7 pesos and 50 centavos per ton. To this was added the bonuses offered for cutting a set number of tons, and which were now paid at the same time as wages were paid. The bonus was 1 peso per ton, which increased the amount to 8 pesos and 50 centavos per ton of sugar-cane. In addition, the labourer received 2 pesos and 50 centavos when he or she cut more than two tons. All this, together with incentives granted by the CEA, had increased the real wages of the workers. In addition, thanks to newly introduced mechanisation, a worker's output was around 22.65 tons per load and per cart. In a study done in the state cane mills by the Secretariat of Labour, it had been shown that between 1 April 1988 and 30 May 1989, there had been a monthly average of 11,850 labourers and 3,623,205 tons of sugar-cane had been cut in that period. When this figure was divided by the number of national and foreign labourers, the average was 50.55 tons per worker per month, which meant 2.14 tons per worker per day. When multiplied by the real price per ton, which was 8 pesos and 50 centavos each worker was earning 18 pesos and 19 centavos per day, representing an increase of 51 per cent over and above the statutory minimum wage for rural workers which was 12 pesos per day. In addition the representative stated that if account were taken of the wage bonus given at the end of the harvest to each worker who cut more than 150 tons, this increased the wage by 5.25 per cent, for a total of 23 pesos and 52 centavos per day, which was 96 per cent in excess of the minimum wage.

It was also envisaged that the Labour Code. in particular sections 200, 201, 202. and 203 will be modified so as to eliminate finally the practice of wage payments being made in tokens, promissory notes, or vouchers. It was hoped that the National Congress would approve this modification so as to give full effect to section 187 of the Labour Code which provides that wages must be paid immediately and directly in legal tender.

In relation to Convention No. 105, the Government representative stated that the problem of Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic was a difficult one. especially given the economic, social and historical conditions of the two countries. The Government of the Dominican Republic was perfectly aware of the problem and of the shared material interests of the island: this had to be taken into account but with prudence so as not to harm the islands resources and national interests. The Government of the Dominican Republic had the firm political will to seek solutions to this problem; its willingness to receive ILO missions, which were afforded all necessary facilities, stood as proof of this. On the occasion of the most recent direct contacts mission, the President of the Republic had established a commission charged with studying the possible ways of finding human and legal solutions to the problem of Haitian agricultural workers. This commission was made up of personages from all social and economic sectors of the country. The problem was an economic one, imposing obligations on both countries which shared a common border yet had different economic and social characteristics. At this time there were about one million Haitian nationals who had crossed the border illegally in search of better economic prospects and who were not being pursued by the immigration authorities of the Dominican Republic. Complaints had been made against the Government, but they had come from a trade union leader who had been expelled from the trade union federation to which he had belonged; these complaints had been made more for political than trade union purposes. and they had been disavowed by his former organisation.

Forced or compulsory labour for nationals or foreigners did not exist in the Dominican Republic; this was shown by the fact that, although sugar-cane being the backbone of the economy of the Dominican Republic, the amount of sugar-cane harvested in the years since the suspension of the agreements between the Dominican Republic and the Republic of Haiti had diminished considerably. This was also indicated by the fact that if there were a desire to resort to forced labour, in a country where there were one million illegal Haitian residents and well-organised police and armed forces, it would have been very easy to recruit the 30,000 to 40,000 persons required for the sugar-cane harvest. Instead, the Government had been obliged to close two sugar mills to take account of this reduction in manpower.

The Government representative stated that at the beginning of the harvest, the CEA had conducted a publicity campaign using the mass media in both the Dominican Republic and in Haiti in order to encourage the contracting of agricultural workers, informing them of the new minimum wage, social programmes (medical and social services), working conditions (hours of work, housing, provision of subsidised foodstuffs and other social benefits). Transport was also paid for persons voluntarily recurited.

The Government of the Dominican Republic was in compliance with Convention No 105 and was taking appropriate measures in this regard. The President of the Republic had named a high-level commission which had recently visited the Republic of Haiti in order to conclude an agreement concerning the situation of Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic. In addition, a formal request for technical assistance had been made to the Director-General of the ILO so that such an agreement would take into account all pertinent international labour standards. The ILO had also been asked to designate an international legal expert specialised in labour standards who could, together with legal experts from the Dominican Republic and Haiti, study the extent of legal standards necessary so as to adopt legislation which would be in complete conformity with the international Conventions ratified by the Dominican Republic.

The Workers' members deeply regretted the fact that the Conference Committee had been discussing this case involving the Dominican Republic for many years, and almost always in the same terms. Despite comments made by the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee, regular observations appearing in the reports of the present Committee (a special paragraph had been included on the case involving the Dominican Republic in the 1988 report), a Commission of Inquiry in 1983 and a direct contacts mission in 1988, there had been practically no results apart from the announcement of the appointment of 60 labour inspectors. The Government had not sent any report and had not replied to any direct request or observation made by the Committee of Experts concerning Convention No. 105. Contrary to the Government's allegations, the legislation and practice in the Dominican Republic were in contradiction to the provisions of this Convention, and this remained the case in spite of many direct contacts and repeated technical assistance by the Office. Although poverty in Haiti could explain the fact that many people cross the border to seek work in the neighbouring country, this could not justify the continuing failure to take measures to give effect to Convention No. 105, in particular concerning regularisation of the status of Haitians who were on Dominican Republic territory. regularisation of procedures for recruitment and residence permits, and other matters referred to by the Committee of Experts. The Workers' members took note that when a trade union body presented claims or complaints in the Dominican Republic, its leaders were thrown out. The leaders who dared to take such action in that country should be congratulated.

The Workers' members wondered about the usefulness of pursuing, year after year, technical assistance from the Office where there had not been, in the short-term, any fundamental changes in the legislation or the practice in the Dominican Republic. Without a firm willingness to fully apply the right to freedom of association and to abolish all that is not in conformity with Convention No. 105 in the national legislation and practice, any further assistance from the ILO would be superfluous.

Without wishing to give up hope, since even the oldest, most serious problems could always be resolved some day, the Workers' members remained deeply concerned in face of the absence of valid and complete replies from the Government.

The Employers' members wished to stress the key points in relation to Convention No. 95, to wit the working conditions for Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic and their legal status, and particularly whether they were working on a legal or an illegal basis and whether force was involved in certain instances. These basic problems had been before the present Committee for a number of years. As to working conditions, the report of the Commission of Inquiry was available and the direct contacts mission had now taken place. The issues involved regular payment of wages, working hours and corresponding wages. the minimum wage, verification of the amount of work performed, payment in cash or with vouchers, facilities in relation to welfare, food and health, prompt payment of wages, wage advances and the Haitian workers, awareness of the working conditions and of their rights. The Employers' members wanted to know what in fact was going on, as opposed to what existed on paper. As indicated by the report of the Committee of Experts, the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and the direct contacts mission, CEA circulars addressed these matters; however, information was not sufficient to say to what extent these circulars were implemented in practice. In its statement before this Committee, the Government had juggled a lot of figures but a written report stating the Government's position on law and practice in relation to each and every issue under examination was still lacking. The overall situation could be determined only on the basis of a comprehensive written report by the Government, which should give information on the results of labour inspections and which should cover private plantations as well as those run by the CEA.

The Employers' members thought the situation in relation to Convention No. 105 was even less clear. In the five points the Committee of Experts had highlighted, their report had mentioned the employment of Haitian workers, whereas the Government had stated earlier that Haitians were being employed but had no legal status and were, especially in the case of young people, being placed under pressure. There were many points here which called for clarification.

The Employers' members referred to the incident involving a fatal accident of a vehicle that had been transporting Haitian workers, with the participation of officials of the Dominican Republic. They also noted the Government's statement of its readiness to find a solution to the problems posed. Mention had been made of a committee to study the issues and make proposals, but according to the Committee of Experts' report, that national committee had fallen apart. For the Employers' members, three measures were essential: (1) the Government must see to it that the legal status of Haitian workers becomes clarified; (2) even if negotiations between the Dominican Republic and Haiti produced no results, national laws and regulations were to govern the conditions of work for these Haitians; (3) the competent authority had to see to it that the legal protections were applied in practice. Much was left to be done. At a minimum, the Government would have to prepare a written report addressing each point, so that the many pending questions could be clarified.

An Employer member of the Dominican Republic wished to present certain clarifications regarding the recruitment of Haitian workers He stated that neither the Republic of Haiti nor the Dominican Republic had the resources to stop illegal border crossings or illegal recruitment of Haitians. This problem before the present Committee was one of long standing, and it was necessary to take into account certain indications and facts referred to by the Government of the Dominican Republic, since they reflected a change in attitude. These were concrete actions which should not be taken lightly. As such he cited statistics showing that fewer than one per cent of Haitian residents in his country were in cutting sugar cane, even though the CEA had had problems because of the shortage of manpower. If round-ups had really been the normal practice for the CEA, there would not have been such shortages this year; a round-up in the city of Santo Domingo alone would have sufficed if this were indeed the practice. Among the measures adopted by the Government and by employers to improve the situation of Haitian workers, mention should be made of the establishment of a study commission on the working and living conditions of Haitian workers, with instructions to adopt the measures necessary to improve those conditions and to comply with international undertakings made by the country The Dominican Republic was interested in reaching an agreement with the Republic of Haiti to clarify the situation of temporary workers, but to do so also required the willingness of the Haitian Government. As additional examples of concrete action, he cited the adoption of Act No. 224 of 1984 on the penal system which had substituted imprisonment for a sentence to carry out public works, thus eliminating the possibility that anyone might be sentenced to compulsory labour. Another positive development had been the re-initiation of discussions with the Haitian authorities in the search for satisfactory solutions, in the short term, and for the establishment of standards and procedures for the contracting of Haitian temporary workers. Other positive deeds that could be stressed were the request for ILO technical assistance, wage improvements and measures taken to increase the number of labour inspectors by 40 per cent. These could not be ignored since they were actions which showed serious purpose and a willingness to seek solutions to these problems.

In regard to Convention No. 95, mention should be made, in relation to comments by the Committee of Experts, that sections 184 et seq. of the Labour Code provided that: (1) wages shall be fixed and paid in full in legal tender (section 187), which implied an express prohibition on the payment of wages in kind; (2) there was a prohibition on deductions from wages, except deductions for trade union dues with the prior written authorisation of the worker, wage advances and legally authorised deductions such as those for social security contributions (section 193); (3) wages were to be paid directly and personally to the worker, one hour before the end of the normal work day, on the date agreed upon (section 188); (4) wage debts of workers enjoyed a privilege against the employers' debts, the workers' creditors and the employers' creditors; (5) the minimum wage was the lowest wage which could be paid to a worker; (6) the law provided for criminal penalties against an employer who makes unlawful deductions, deferred payment or did not pay wages in full. The non-respect for, or the non-payment of, the statutory minimum wage was also subject to criminal penalties. The employers had, along with the CEA, provided for a substantial increase in the price per ton of cut sugar cane. Wages were now paid weekly, which also served to avoid illegal trade in sugar cane received by the CEA. It was not necessary to adopt laws similar or identical to those already in force; rather the key point was applying the laws already in force and having trade unions and workers exercise their rights in accordance with legally established procedures.

The Workers' member of Greece stated that the present Committee was fortunately not a court. If it were, he said, there would be convictions for perjury. Concerning the application of Conventions Nos. 95 and 105, the Government representative of the Dominican Republic and the Employers' member of this country had denied the indications of the Committee of Experts regarding the wages of workers on sugar cane plantations, transport of Haitian workers to sugar cane plantations on vehicules chartered by the CEA and under military escort, and the round-ups of persons of Haitian origin (including young persons of second-generation Haitian origin who had Dominican Republic nationality). The Government representative had stated that this involved false information and unfounded accusations designed to support a tourism boycott of the country. The speaker wondered who was lying and who was spreading false information?

Referring to the suggestion by the Government representative that the trade union representatives who had lodged a complaint had been thrown out of their own trade union organisations, the speaker wished to know whether the representatives of these two trade union organisations cited in the report of the Committee of Experts were present at the International Labour Conference, and if not, why not. And if, as had just been stated, one million Haitians came to the Dominican Republic without any papers, why could not the authorities of that country regularise their status? The speaker wondered about the expediency of concluding an accord between the host country and the country of origin; this might be indispensable but in any case these workers should be able to have their status regularised and should be treated like human beings. Finally, the speaker noted that the lengthy replies given had neither contained the substance desired, nor permitted the present Committee to overcome its feelings of impotence in the face of a situation which was intolerable from the point of view of freedom of association, freedom of labour and human rights.

The Worker member of the United Kingdom thanked the Government representative for the information provided. He also expressed gratitude to the Employer member of the Dominican Republic for independently assisting the Government in providing necessary facts. Paraphrasing Shakespeare ("Methinks they do protest too much"), the speaker said that forced recruitment had been the principal tool used by the Dominican Republic for years to compensate for the shortage of voluntary labour in the sugar cane harvest, where wages were low. He referred to the incident involving the truck accident as proving the involvement of the army of the Dominican Republic. He said that the accident had occurred on 27 January 1989, when a truck overturned while carrying 78 persons, including 73 Haitian cane workers who were being guarded (not accompanied) by two Dominican Republic soldiers on their way to a plantation near Santo Domingo. Forty-seven people had been killed, including one of the soldiers. Several survivors of the accident had told of being captured by the military and kept prisoner in military barracks before being put in the plantation-bound truck. Citing a number of detailed newspaper accounts, the speaker stated that the father of the truck driver had said his son regularly made trips for the CEA, and that the son had been hired by the military on behalf of the CEA, which paid him in their Santo Domingo offices. The truck driver corroborated this account, specifying the amount he was paid by the State for each worker transported. When the CEA initially denied involvement in transporting Haitian cane cutters, the National Federation of Truckowners (FENATRADO) had publicly contradicted this. FENETRADO had made public a document signed by a military commander authorising the shipment of 75 Haitian workers and had stated that such transport was regularly engaged in at the direction of the military. The only way to get to the ultimate truth in this case would be to send independent observers who could be present during the entire period of the harvest. He wondered if it would be possible for the ILO to do this. Until the evidence was in, the matter had to be pursued. The information provided by the Government had not been satisfactory. Serious infringements of Convention No. 105 had been taking place for many years now and the case had to be pursued until resolved.

A Government representative of Haiti, the Minister of Social Affairs, wished to recall several matters. The central question in this discussion had already been brought before the present Committee on a number of occasions and had been the subject of an inquiry in 1982-1983 which had issued recommendations to the Governments of Haiti and the Dominican Republic concerning the application of certain Conventions ratified by those two countries. Since then the government regime in Haiti had changed, and since 1985-1986 there had been no agreement authorising recruitment of Haitians to work in the Dominican Republic. Nonetheless, Haitian workers were continuing to go to the Dominican Republic and there were many problems in connection with this.

In regard to Conventions Nos. 95 and 105, the Government of Haiti wished to concur in the observations and recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry in 1983 and of the supervisory bodies on the application of standards, since the ILO is an international institution with jurisdiction, in a sense, over problems involving labour and working conditions throughout the world, and it is an institution which had to ensure respect for its Conventions by ratifying States. In 1988, his Government had, in agreement with the Government of the Dominican Republic requested a direct contacts mission in the two countries in order to assess the situation on the spot.

One week before the speaker's departure from Haiti to attend this Conference, he had received a high-level delegation from the Dominican Republic which had averred the good will and the good faith of the Government of the Dominican Republic concerning measures to take towards improving the situation of Haitian workers. The long-standing problem was in fact very complex, and it had been rather neglected by previous government regimes. The general crisis Haiti was facing means that unemployed peasants were compelled to leave to find work elsewhere, without it being possible for any national solution to be found to the problem. For this reason, his Government had let the delegation of the Dominican Republic which had come to Haiti know that it was ready to seek a solution on the basis of negotiations and perhaps even an agreement between the two States. Such an agreement should deal with two aspects.

The first was that the Government of the Dominican Republic should implement the recommendations made by the Commission of Inquiry, which had been taken up later in comments of the supervisory bodies. This meant granting legal status to Haitian workers who were already in the Dominican Republic and whose situation was considered irregular and illegal. In addition, a distinction should be made regarding Haitians who had lived for many years in the Dominican Republic and who could be granted resident status as well as a work permit and a residence permit. Moreover, under the law of the Dominican Republic, Haitians who had been born and lived in the Dominican Republic should be recognised as having Dominican Republic nationality or should be granted resident status. In relation to working conditions, housing, social security and so forth, Haitian workers should be treated the same as Dominican Republic workers and should have the same legal entitlement to benefits in case of sickness or accident; this applied equally to the housing and sanitary conditions on the "bateys".

The second point was that to the extent that the Government of the Dominican Republic followed up on these recommendations, which involved a plan for regularising the status of Haitians in the Dominican Republic, the Government of Haiti was willing to consider the possibility of an agreement on the migration of Haitian workers. This would involve the Government of the Dominican Republic giving the necessary guarantees so that Haitian workers would have legal papers permitting them to move about, to receive prior to their departure a clear and explicit contract of employment explaining the work to be done, the wages, the housing conditions, the payment system, etc.

The third point was that such negotiations should necessarily include the ILO since there was already a legal procedure under way in accordance with the ILO standards and since the matter had in a way already been adjudicated in the ILO. The Haitian Government called for the Governments of Haiti and of the Dominican Republic to jointly request ILO technical assistance so that there could be machinery on the spot which would permit verification of the follow-up given to the recommendations.

Fourthly, the Government of Haiti also suggested the establishment of a Haitian-Dominican Republic mixed commission composed of representatives of the private sector, the trade unions and the Governments of the two countries which would also watch to see whether the agreement was being respected and which could even serve to arbitrate in case of a conflict in interpretation.

Moreover, the Government of Haiti urged that it be authorised to send periodically a national commission to investigate the situation of Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic and to report to the Haitian Government. Finally, his Government urged that there be a corps of Haitian inspectors and superintendents who could work alongside Haitian workers on the "bateys" in order to help them formulate their claims and assist them in resolving problems.

In conclusion, the Government representative of Haiti thanked the representative of the Dominican Republic for having provided information on certain measures taken by his Government, particularly the establishment of a national commission composed of independent persons. He indicated that it was a human tragedy that workers were subjected to conditions of this sort and that the Conference Committee on Standards had not found any solution after having examined the question many times.

The Government representative of the Dominican Republic stated that his country and the Republic of Haiti shared the same island and that the economic situation of both countries was extremely difficult, although even more so in Haiti. He indicated that, as the Secretary for Social Affairs of the Republic of Haiti had said, the social and economic situation in that country was dramatic, in both urban and rural areas, and the same could be said for the Dominican Republic. The problem had perhaps not always been tackled with the same energy the Dominican Republic was now bringing to bear, but, as the Employer member of the Dominican Republic had pointed out, it was necessary to have two parties to conclude an agreement. The Republic of Haiti was now moving towards democracy and with this development it was hoped that agreements could be concluded so as to resolve these problems. The Government representative referred to a letter from the Minister of Social Affairs of the Republic to the highlevel mission which had recently visited Haiti. The letter made four main points: (1) implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry which had visited Haiti in 1982-1983; (2) renewal of an agreement covering various forms of payment, freedom of association, the conclusion of individual contracts of employment and other working conditions; (3) a request by both Governments for ILO technical assistance; (4) authorisation granted to the Government of the Dominican Republic to have a Haitian mission visit the Dominican Republic to verify implementation of the agreement.

The Government representative stated that his country sincerely wished to respect the provisions of Convention No. 105 and to this end the Government had taken effective measures, as shown by the statistics presented. It had been unfortunate that in this Committee it had been said that if it were a court, there would have been convictions for perjury. The problem was a critical one and the direct contacts mission that had visited the Dominican Republic, although it had not stayed long, had stated in its report that it was not in a position to verify the nature of the recruitment or to know exactly where it took place. According to the Government representative, this mission had not been able to establish whether it was voluntary or forced recruitment, since there was no proof of maltreatment of Haitian nationals, much less of forced labour. It was true that a lot of propaganda has appeared in the press; but any journalist who went to a developing country in Latin America or Africa could find and write about desperate situations which were much worse than what was happening in the Dominican Republic. He averred that in no country of Latin America were the rights of citizens and public freedoms enjoyed as much as in the Dominican Republic.

With regard to wages, he stated that statistics had been placed before the present Committee in relation to Convention No. 95. They showed that under Decision No. 188 of 1988, a minimum wage had been set for agricultural workers, that it was paid directly, as ensured by section 187 of the Labour Code, and that in addition, national and Haitian workers who worked in sugar cane cutting earned wages that exceeded the minimum wage by 51 per cent and by 96 per cent when additional bonuses where counted. A serious effort had been made in the Dominican Republic to respect and comply with ILO standards. If the Dominican Republic made contacts with the ILO to request technical assistance it was because this Organisation was established to assist and advise countries encountering serious economic problems as in the case of the Dominican Republic. It was a duty on the part of the Organisation to provide such assistance so as to permit the conclusion of agreements to bring an end to these problems. The Government representative said he had not indicated that in the past there had been no infringements of the Conventions; rather, he had stated that it could not be denied that at the present time serious efforts were being made and that some progress had been made.

The Workers' members inquired whether it would be possible to send, for example, one or more ILO observers to follow the actual situation in the sugar cane plantations over a certain length of time and to determine what was to be done. They also wondered whether within the next few months, the amendments needed in the legislation of the Dominican Republic would be made so as to bring it into conformity with Conventions Nos. 87, 95, 98 and 105.

The Government representative stated that it seemed that the Dominican Republic was being compelled to do what the Workers' member wanted. He had agreed with their statement. Nevertheless, in relation to one of the points raised by the Government representative Haiti, that permission has already been granted to have a verification commission visit the Dominican Republic; also, the two Governments had decided to request ILO assistance. He also said that the Government of his country was making all possible efforts, not just promises, in the sense of concrete actions such as contacts with the Haitian Government. He stated that the Ministry of Labour, which the speaker heads, would ensure through its inspectors that international labour standards in force in the Dominican Republic were being respected. Once he returned home, he would send the ILO a detailed report on the progress made up to now; with a view to satisfying the Workers' members, he would send a list of the names of the new labour inspectors and would indicate the budget of the Labour Secretariat, which had been increased by 2.26 million pesos to total 6.9 million pesos.

The Workers' members proposed that this case be mentioned in a special paragraph of the Conference Committee's report. The Employers' members agreed, provided the conclusions would refer specifically to the application of Conventions Nos. 95 and 105.

The Government representative reiterated the political will on the part of his Government to respect the Conventions it had ratified and he recalled the efforts it had made towards this end. The Government considered it unjust to have this case mentioned in a special paragraph.

The Committee, taking note of the direct contacts which took place in October 1988, expressed its extreme concern over the situation of Haitian workers.

The Committee regretted that once again no government report had been received and that the Government representative had merely provided some information in regard to labour inspection and minimum wages.

The Committee stressed that there had been no progress, either in terms of legislation or in practice, on essential points raised over a number of years by the Commission of Inquiry, the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee.

The Committee further noted that the Dominican Republic had requested ILO assistance in order to ensure the application of the Conventions in both its legislation and in practice. In this regard, the Committee considered that special efforts were called for so that the ILO could, as from the next harvest, verify the situation and ascertain on the spot that improvements which had been promised but were still awaited had in fact been made. The Committee insisted upon the need for the Government to take the necessary measures whose implementation should be verified in practice.

The Committee also noted that the Government had requested ILO assistance in drawing up an agreement with Haiti concerning the migration of workers. The Committee trusted that any agreement drawn up with ILO assistance would particularly heed the comments of the supervisory bodies. The Committee also trusted that, whether or not such an agreement were concluded, the Government of the Dominican Republic would without delay take the measures necessary to give full effect to the comments made by the ILO supervisory bodies.

The Committee decided to mention this case in a special paragraph of its general report.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1988, Publication: 75th ILC session (1988)

A Government representative stated that since 16 August 1986 his country had entered into a different political and economic period and that they were now concerned to correct fundamental errors and to reconstruct the nation's forces. This did not imply recognition of the accusation made with respect to non-compliance with Conventions Nos. 98 and 105. In relation to Convention No. 105. In relation to Convention No. 105 it had not ruled out that violations of this Convention had been committed in the past, but the Government had now adopted remedial measures which respected human rights. Amongst others these included the need to seek out and repress the recruitment of foreign workers and their clandestine employment. At present, they were carrying out periodic investigations in regard to clandestine employment in the sugar plantations. Illegal immigration from Haiti was very difficult to control. His country did not wish to carry out mass repatriation in applying, with police help, the laws concerning migration and health. Clandestine employment and its inherent wrongs derived from the social and economic conditions of Haiti.

In regard to Convention No. 98, he stated that no legal text prevented a worker, national or foreign, from enjoying the rights to live and to work, or to join a trade union, the organisation of which was provided for in the Labour Code. Haitian workers were, in every respect, entitled to the same rights in regard to employment as foreign or Dominican workers. Labour legislation was applied without any difference to foreign workers.

Given that the 1983 Commission of Inquiry had taken place in an era in which Government authorities neglected to show the attention that it should have to a number of crucial problems, his Government had made a request to the Director-General of the ILO for a direct contacts mission to be undertaken in the Dominican Republic as soon as possible.

The Workers' members stated that this case had been discussed for several years but that the situation remained unchanged. A new and interesting element in this case was the official request by the Government for a high-level direct contacts mission to be carried out. This mission should look into all problems, it should involve the Government, employers' organisations and trade unions, and it should draw up recommendations in order to bring about the necessary changes in law and practice.

Referring to Convention No. 95 they stated that this Convention represented protection for people who lived in acute poverty. As yet no satisfactory reply had been given, either to the observations of the Committee of Experts or to the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry in regard to this intolerable situation.

In regard to Convention No. 98, they regretted the violation of the trade union rights of rural workers who had been excluded from the provisions of the Labour Code, and that the Government had merely given a promise to consider draft legislation. They stressed the importance of the agricultural sector which in their opinion merited special attention.

In relation to Convention No. 105 they referred to the unacceptable situation of Haitian plantation workers, which, although frequently illegal, was tolerated by the Government as well as exploited by employers.

Having taken into consideration the good will that the Government had shown, they proposed that the case be mentioned in a special paragraph in order to emphasise the importance both of the problem and the Government's willingness to resolve it. They hoped that the mission requested by the Government would contribute to the improvement of the situation in the two countries.

The Employers' members observed that this case had been under discussion since 1973 and that according to the report of the Committee of Experts specific replies to important questions had still not been received. In regard to Convention No. 95, the 1983 Commission of Inquiry had made specific recommendations for wage protection. In particular, this concerned the Payment of wages in negotiable vouchers, and the observance of minimum wages on sugar plantations where wages were based on output, that is, on the quantity of sugar cane harvested. The Government representative had not replied in a specific manner to any of these questions. The situation was the same for Convention No. 98. The Commission of Inquiry had drawn up a series of recommendations in regard to the application of this Convention to Haitian workers who were employed on sugar cane plantations. No specific measures had been taken in response to these, and the statement by the Government representative confirmed previous statements on the difficult in controlling those people who had entered the country illegally. In reference to Convention No. 105 the Report of the Committee of Experts indicated that although Haitian workers were not legally hired but were obliged by force to carry out the work in the Dominican Republic. The Government had mentioned illegal immigration and the problems therein, but had not given any information on whether or not new agreements between Haiti and the Dominican Republic had been concluded.

The Employers' members considered that the only new item in the discussion had been the proposal to send a direct contacts mission, but this did not alter the fact that the Government representative had not mentioned anything which had actually changed the situation or would change it in the future. They remarked that three important Conventions had been violated in the Dominican Republic and regretted the discrepancy that existed between the standards and their application.

The Government representative of Haiti announced his satisfaction with the statement made by the Government representative of the Dominican Republic in which he spoke of the willingness of his Government to put an end to the errors which had been made in the past. However, he was surprised that the requirement to observe the Conventions was considered to be a punishement and that Haitians had benefited from the good will of the Dominican Republic when this behaviour was in any case required by the Conventions. The case caused great anxiety to his Government and was of great interest to Haitian citizens. He considered it opportune that a direct contacts mission was to be undertaken but stressed that the carrying out of this mission should not end the discussion of this case by the Committee.

The Worker member of the Dominican Republic stated that Convention No. 98 continued to be violated by private and public employers and that the Labour Code contained provisions which did not comply with the Convention. As well, in one specific case, in the Dominican Republic the Executive Power had frozen the application of a collective agreement. Notwithstanding this, the present Government could not be accused of having an anti-trade union attitude. Recently tripartite dialogue had taken place and had led to a draft amendment being presented to the National Congress to change those provisions which did not comply with Convention No. 98. She stated that Haitian workers were members of trade unions, with rights to vote and be elected. The problem which did exist affected all workers and concerned the establishment of trade unions.

Referring to Convention No. 95 she said that the problem of the exclusion of agricultural workers from the Labour Code continued to exist.

In relation to Convention No. 105 she remarked that there was a problem, which was widely known. She believed that if the Dominican Republic was traditionally going to seek Haitian workers for sugar cane harvesting, the Government was obliged to offer these workers normal and adequate living and working conditions. She stated she was satisfied with the present positive attitude of the Government, which was aware of the problem and had proposed that a mission visit the country in order to find a solution to the problem.

The Worker member for the United States of America emphasised the importance of the case which had now been discussed by the present Committee for the fifth consecutive time. Noting that the case concerning Convention No. 105 had appeared in a special paragraph in 1984 and 1987, he insisted on the necessity to undertake action, which could take the form of a direct mission.

The Workers' members proposed that the text of the conclusion appear in a special paragraph of the report of the present Committee. They stated that they were satisfied with the frank and constructive discussion which had taken place.

The Employers' members agreed to the Workers' members' proposal. They repeated that the special paragraph was not a penalty but highlighted a particular problem. They hoped that the text of the special paragraph would reflect the hopes that the direct contacts mission had given rise to.

The Committee took note of the information provided by the Government representative, as well as the extensive and detailed discussion which took place in the Committee while expressing its concern as regards the situation. The Committee welcomed the proposal made by the Government to invite an ILO direct contacts mission. The Committee expressed the hope that this mission would assist in removing the various discrepancies which existed regarding the application of these Conventions as well as others covered by the Commission of Inquiry in 1983, and that the Government would be able to report progress in law and practice the following year. The Committee decided to include this case in a special paragraph of its general report.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1987, Publication: 73rd ILC session (1987)

See under Convention No. 98, as follows:

A Government representative stated that the situation had changed in that in 1987, just as in the two previous years, no Haitian workers had been engaged. Furthermore, there had been contacts between the Governments of Haiti and the Dominican Republic with a view to obtaining a complete and extensive revision of the process of recruiting Haitian workers.

The Workers' members stated that they had no information relating to the hiring of Haitian workers in 1987. In contrast, as far as 1986 was concerned they had received information according to which Haitian workers had been engaged and the existence of forced labour that been reported. As far as the right to collective bargaining was concerned there were serious difficulties since trade union representative did not enjoy any protection and could be dismissed. They felt it was impossible to have a clear view of the situation because of the lack of information and the absence of a reply from the Government, circumstances which prevented any dialogue. They considered that in spite of what the Government representative had said, this case should be mentioned in a special paragraph. They hoped that the information requested would be provided as quickly as possible and that the necessary progress would be achieved so as to ensure full conformity with this Convention and Conventions Nos. 95 and 105.

The Employers' members observed that no changes had occurred in the legislation. They stated that in spite of the Government representative's statement, there was informal recruitment of Haitian workers and this recruitment took place in conditions which were far from satisfactory, if not deplorable. They observed that no reply to the comments of the Committee of Experts had been received and stated that as long as no steps were taken to put the legislation into conformity with the Convention, this should be indicated in the report. The Employers' members supported the Workers' members' proposal that this case be mentioned in a special paragraph.

The Government representative stated that there was no forced labour in the Dominican Republic. He said that for two years no Haitian workers had been recruited and that Haitians working in the Dominican Republic enjoyed the same rights as Dominican workers. What did exist was clandestine work by Haitian workers who illegally crossed the border. This was a phenomenon which could be controlled only with difficulty. Nevertheless the authorities of the tow countries were working in good faith to resolve these problems. He hoped that the good faith of the Government, proof of which was its appearance before this Committee, would also be acknowledged.

As concerns the application by the Dominican Republic of Convention No. 98, the Committee took note of the explanations provided by the Government representative. It observed with regret that no information had been provided in reply to the comments of the Committee of Experts. This Committee hoped that the necessary action would be taken soon and that the progress that had been achieved would be reported. The Committee decided to mention this case in a special paragraph of its report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Prison sentences involving the obligation to work as a punishment for expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee notes that the Government does not provide any information in its report on the application in practice of – and the measures taken to amend – sections 86 and 368 (regarding offensive or abusive statements against the head of State), and sections 369, 370 and 372 (regarding defamation of persons exercising public authority) of the Penal Code, which establish penalties of imprisonment involving compulsory labour pursuant to sections 4(6), 5(5) and 94 of Act No. 113-21 regulating the prison system in the Dominican Republic.

The Committee recalls the 2016 judgment (Decision No. TC/075/16) of the Constitutional Court which emphasized that the imposition of criminal penalties for any act of defamation or abuse against any public official in the exercise of his/her functions or any person performing public duties constitutes a legal limitation that affects the very essence of freedom of expression and opinion. Accordingly, the Committee once again expresses the hope that, as part of the revision of the Penal Code which is under way, the sections of the Penal Code referred to above will be amended in accordance with Article 1(a) of the Convention, which prohibits the imposition of the penalty of imprisonment involving compulsory labour on persons who express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. While the above-mentioned revision is in progress, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of the said legal provisions, indicating the types of offences and the penalties imposed.

Article 1(b). Mobilization and use of labour for purposes of economic development. With regard to the application of article 75(4) of the National Constitution, which obliges Dominican citizens between 16 and 21 years of age to provide “services for development”, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the work performed under this provision of the Constitution is voluntary and that persons between 16 and 21 years of age are assigned activities which are not hazardous. In these cases, as a part of civic responsibility, light tasks in the area of reforestation are imposed.

The Committee notes that although article 75(4) of the Constitution establishes that, for persons aged 21 years, services for development may be provided voluntarily, this is not the case for citizens between the ages of 16 and 21 years since this article refers to a fundamental duty that requires action on the part of a person. The Committee therefore requests the Government to send a copy of the text which regulates the duty to provide services for development as established by article 75(4) of the Constitution, and to clarify the provision which establishes the voluntary nature of such services for citizens between 16 and 21 years of age. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate examples of work required under this provision of the Constitution, and also the penalties incurred by persons who refuse to perform work required as a consequence of that duty.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Prison sentences involving the obligation to work as a punishment for expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. For a number of years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to certain provisions of the Penal Code and of Act No. 6132 on the expression and dissemination of opinions, under the terms of which defamatory, offensive or abusive statements against public servants and certain persons in public authority representing the established political, social or economic system are punishable by imprisonment. Noting that, under the terms of section 57 of Act No. 224-84 regulating the prison system, individuals who are sentenced to imprisonment are required to perform compulsory prison labour, the Committee emphasized the fact that the imposition of imprisonment entailing compulsory prison labour affects the application of Article 1(a) of the Convention when it constitutes a punishment for expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee referred in particular to the following provisions of the Penal Code:

• -sections 86 and 368: offensive or abusive public statements against the head of State;
• -sections 369 and 372: defamation or abuse of deputies, representatives of Congress, secretaries of State, magistrates of the Supreme Court or of courts of first instance;
• -section 370: defamation of persons exercising public authority.

It also referred to the provisions of Act No. 6132 which criminalize offensive statements against the President of the Republic (section 26), and defamatory and abusive statements against courts and tribunals, the armed forces, the police, the legislative chambers, municipal authorities and other state institutions, members of the Cabinet and members of the legislative chambers, public servants, or persons exercising public authority (sections 30, 31 and 34).

The Committee noted that in 2005 the Supreme Court of Justice found that laws criminalizing the expression of criticism against public officials infringe freedom of expression. The Committee also noted that the Media Commission of the Chamber of Deputies was examining several draft laws tabled to amend Act No. 6132. The Committee observes that the Government refers in its report to various rights which give effect to freedom of expression and information as guaranteed by the Constitution, including the right of individuals to reply where they consider that the disseminated information is damaging to them. The Government does not provide any information on the current status of the draft laws which were being examined by the Chamber of Deputies. However, it has come to the Committee’s attention that an action was brought in the Constitutional Court to declare unconstitutional certain provisions of Act No. 6132, and that in its Decision No. TC/075/16 of February 2016 the Constitutional Court declared sections 30, 31, 34 and 37 of the Act null and void for not being in conformity with the Constitution. It considered that “establishing criminal penalties for any defamatory or abusive statements against public employees in the course of their duties or persons exercising public authority constitutes a legal limitation which affects the very essence of freedom of expression and opinion via the press when these public employees, by the very nature of their functions, are subjected to social control …”.

The Committee takes due note of the Constitutional Court decision and expresses the firm hope that the necessary steps will be taken to amend the abovementioned provisions of the Penal Code, under which defamatory, abusive or offensive statements against certain public authorities and certain persons in public authority are punishable by imprisonment, so that no prison sentence entailing compulsory labour may be imposed on individuals who express political opinions or engage in peaceful opposition to the established system. It also hopes that any new law adopted to regulate the media will take account of the obligations deriving from the provisions of Article 1 of the Convention. In the meantime, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the number of persons convicted under the abovementioned provisions of the Penal Code, the nature of the charges laid against them and any penalties imposed on them, and to send copies of any relevant court decisions.

Article 1(b). Mobilization and use of labour for purposes of economic development. The Committee previously asked the Government to supply information on the obligation to provide “services for development” as prescribed by article 75(4) of the Constitution for Dominican citizens aged between 16 and 21 years. The Committee notes with regret that the Government has still not supplied information on this matter in its report. The Committee requests the Government to review the obligation to provide “services for development” in the light of Article 1(b) of the Convention, which prohibits the use of compulsory labour as a method of mobilizing and using labour for the purposes of economic development. In the meantime, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the precise nature of this duty set out in the Constitution and the manner in which it is implemented in practice, indicating the penalties incurred by any persons who refuse to work in the context of the obligation to provide “services for development”. The Committee also requests the Government to provide examples of any legislation adopted in this respect.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Prison sentences involving the obligation to work as a punishment for expressing political views. In its previous comments, the Committee expressed the hope that the process of revising the legislation on the media would lead to the amendment of the provisions of the Penal Code and of Act No. 6132 of 1962 on the expression and dissemination of opinions, under which defamation, offence or slander are punishable by imprisonment. The provisions are as follows:

• -Penal Code: section 86 (public offence against the Head of State); sections 368 (public slander against the Head of State), 369 and 372 (defamation and slander against deputies, representatives of Congress, secretaries of State, magistrates of the Supreme Court or of courts of first instance); section 370 (defamation of persons exercising public authority);
• -Sections 26 and 34 of Act No. 6132: offence against the President of the Republic and slander against courts and tribunals, the armed forces, the police, the legislative chambers, municipal authorities and other state institutions, members of the Cabinet and members of the legislative chambers, public servants, or persons exercising public authority.

Noting that, pursuant to section 57 of Act No. 224-84 regulating the prison regime, individuals who are sentenced to imprisonment are required to perform compulsory prison labour, the Committee recalled previously that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits any form of forced or compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a punishment for expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system.

The Committee notes that, in its report, the Government refers to legal consultations, but the documents that it indicated as being annexed were not attached to the report. The Committee notes that, according to information available on the Chamber of Deputies’ website, several draft laws have been tabled to amend Act No. 6132 on the expression and dissemination of opinions, and are being examined by the Media Commission. The Committee recalls, in this regard, that in 2005 the Supreme Court of Justice found in Ruling No. 91 that laws criminalizing the expression of criticisms of public officials infringe freedom of expression. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the necessary measures will be taken to ensure that this legislative process results in the amendment of the above provisions of Act No. 6132 on the expression and dissemination of opinions, and of the Penal Code, in order to bring them into line with the Convention and therefore guarantee that no prison sentence may be imposed on individuals who express political opinions or engage in peaceful opposition to the established system.

Article 1(b). Mobilization and use of labour for purposes of economic development. The Committee previously drew the Government’s attention to article 75(4) of the Constitution, which includes the provision of services for development among the fundamental duties of citizens aged between 16 and 21 years. The Committee recalls that Article 1(b) of the Convention prohibits the use of compulsory labour as a method of mobilizing and using labour for purposes of economic development. In the absence of a reply in this regard, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the nature of this fundamental duty set out in the Constitution and the manner in which it is implemented in practice, indicating the penalties incurred by persons who refuse to carry out work required within the framework of this duty. Please provide copies of any legislation adopted in this respect.

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

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sentences of imprisonment involving the obligation to work imposed as a punishment for expressing political opinions. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that violation of certain provisions of the Penal Code and Act No. 6132 of 1962 on the expression and dissemination of opinions in respect of affront, defamation or slander may be punished by a sentence of imprisonment. Noting that convicted prisoners are under the obligation to work (section 57 of Act No. 224-84 regulating the prison regime), the Committee drew the Government’s attention to the incidence of the Convention applied to sentences of imprisonment involving the obligation to work for offences related to the holding or expressing of political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee referred to section 86 of the Penal Code (public offence against the Head of State), section 368 of the Penal Code (public affront against the Head of State), sections 369 and 372 of the Penal Code (defamation and slander against deputies, representatives of congress, secretaries of state, magistrates of the Supreme Court or of courts of first instance), section 370 (defamation of depositaries of public authority) and sections 25 and 34 of Act No. 6132 (concerning, respectively, offence against the President of the Republic and defamation against courts and tribunals, the armed forces, the police, the chambers of Congress, municipal authorities and other state institutions, members of the Cabinet and one or more members of the legislative chambers, one or more public servants, one or more depositaries of public authority).

The Committee noted that, in Ruling No. 91 of 16 December 2005, the Supreme Court of Justice, referring to the Act on the expression and dissemination of opinions, applied the principles of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and held that laws that criminalize the expression of opinions which are offensive to public officials are contrary to freedom of expression. Noting this case law, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures adopted to bring the national legislation into line with Article 1 of the Convention, which prohibits the use of any form of forced or compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a punishment for expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee notes the absence of information on this subject in the Government’s report. It has nevertheless come to its knowledge that a commission has been established with responsibility for examining the legislation respecting the media and that it is reported to have prepared draft legislation in this field. The Committee hopes that on the occasion of this review of the legislation the Government will take the necessary measures to amend the provisions of Act No. 6132 on the expression and dissemination of opinions and of the Penal Code. In the meantime, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the number of persons convicted on the basis of these provisions, the nature of the charges brought and the sanctions imposed including, where appropriate, copies of the relevant court rulings.

Article 1(b). Mobilization and use of labour for purposes of economic development. The Committee notes the adoption on 26 January 2010 of a new Constitution. It observes that Article 75(4) includes among the fundamental duties of citizens the provision of services for development. The provision of such services is required for Dominican nationals of both sexes between the ages of 16 and 21 years. It may be carried out voluntarily by persons over the age of 21. Article 75(4) specifies that such services shall be regulated by law. The Committee observes that this constitutional provision appears to impose upon all citizens between the ages of 16 and 21 years an obligation to work with a view to participating in the development of the country. It recalls that Article 1(b) of the Convention prohibits the use of compulsory labour as a method of mobilizing and using labour for purposes of economic development. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information on the nature of this fundamental duty set out in the Constitution and the manner in which it is given effect in practice, with an indication of the penalties incurred by persons who refuse to carry out work required under the terms of this duty. Please provide copies of any legislation adopted in this respect.

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

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 following matters raised in its previous direct request.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Punishment for expressing political views. In earlier comments, the Committee referred to certain provisions of the Penal Code and the Act on the Expression and Dissemination of Opinions, No. 6132 of 1962, the implementation of which could affect application of the Convention since they provide for penalties of imprisonment involving the obligation to work for offences pertaining to freedom of expression relating to authorities that represent the established political, social or economic system. The provisions in question are section 86 of the Penal Code under which any public offence against the Head of State is punishable by a prison term of from six months to two years and a fine; section 368, under which any defamation or public affront against the Head of State is punishable by imprisonment of three months to one year and a fine. Defamation and affront against deputies, representatives of Congress, secretaries of State, magistrates of the Supreme Court or courts of first instance is punishable, under sections 369 and 372, with imprisonment of from eight days to six months and a fine and defamation against depositories of public authority is punishable under section 370 with a prison term of from eight days to three months and a fine. Act No. 6132 of 19 December 1962 on the expression and dissemination of opinions likewise provides for prison sentences for offence against the President of the Republic (from three months’ to one year’s imprisonment and a fine, or only one of these two penalties (section 26)); defamation against courts and tribunals, the armed forces, the police, the chambers of Congress, municipal authorities and other state institutions, members of the Cabinet, one or more members of the chambers of Congress, one or more public servants, one or more depositories of public authority, is punishable by imprisonment of from six days to three months and a fine, or only one of these two penalties (section 34).

The Committee has pointed out that, under section 57 of Act No. 224-84 regulating the prison regime, work is compulsory for all prisoners who are convicted. It can be inferred from the foregoing that breach of the abovementioned provisions of the Penal Code and the Act on the expression and dissemination of opinions, on offence, defamation and affront could be punished by imprisonment involving an obligation to work.

The Committee notes that in its report the Government states that there have been only two court decisions under the abovementioned provisions, in cases that are not material to the application of the Convention. However, the Committee notes with interest that, in Decision No. 91 of 16 December 2005, the Supreme Court of Justice, referring to the Act on the expression and dissemination of opinions, applied the principles of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which holds that laws that criminalize expression offensive to public officials are contrary to freedom of expression.

The Committee again points out that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits all recourse to forced or compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a means of political coercion or education or as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system.

In view of what the case law says regarding the application of Act No. 6132, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to bring the national legislation into line with the Convention by amending or repealing sections 26 and 34 of the Act on the expression and dissemination of opinions, and sections 368, 369, 370 and 372 of the Penal Code, and to provide information on the progress made in this respect. Meanwhile, it asks the Government to provide information on the number of persons sentenced under these provisions, the nature of the charges against them and the penalties imposed, and to provide copies of the relevant judicial decisions.

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

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Punishment for expressing political views. In earlier comments the Committee referred to certain provisions of the Penal Code and the Act on the Expression and Dissemination of Opinions, No. 6132 of 1962, the implementation of which could affect application of the Convention since they provide for penalties of imprisonment involving the obligation to work for offences pertaining to freedom of expression relating to authorities that represent the established political, social or economic system. The provisions in question are section 86 of the Penal Code under which any public offence against the Head of State is punishable by a prison term of from six months to two years and a fine; section 368, under which any defamation or public affront against the Head of State is punishable by imprisonment of three months to one year and a fine. Defamation and affront against deputies, representatives of Congress, secretaries of State, magistrates of the Supreme Court or courts of first instance is punishable, under sections 369 and 372, with imprisonment of from eight days to six months and a fine and defamation against depositories of public authority is punishable under section 370 with a prison term of from eight days to three months and a fine. Act No. 6132 of 19 December 1962 on the expression and dissemination of opinions likewise provides for prison sentences for offence against the President of the Republic (from three months’ to one year’s imprisonment and a fine, or only one of these two penalties (section 26)); defamation against courts and tribunals, the armed forces, the police, the chambers of Congress, municipal authorities and other state institutions, members of the Cabinet, one or more members of the chambers of Congress, one or more public servants, one or more depositories of public authority, is punishable by imprisonment of from six days to three months and a fine, or only one of these two penalties (section 34).

The Committee has pointed out that, under section 57 of Act No. 224-84 regulating the prison regime, work is compulsory for all prisoners who are convicted. It can be inferred from the foregoing that breach of the abovementioned provisions of the Penal Code and the Act on the expression and dissemination of opinions, on offence, defamation and affront could be punished by imprisonment involving an obligation to work.

The Committee notes that in its report the Government states that there have been only two court decisions under the abovementioned provisions, in cases that are not material to the application of the Convention. However, the Committee notes with interest that, in Decision No. 91 of 16 December 2005, the Supreme Court of Justice, referring to the Act on the expression and dissemination of opinions, applied the principles of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which holds that laws that criminalize expression offensive to public officials are contrary to freedom of expression.

The Committee again points out that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits all recourse to forced or compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a means of political coercion or education or as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system.

In view of what the case law says regarding the application of Act No. 6132, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to bring the national legislation into line with the Convention by amending or repealing sections 26 and 34 of the Act on the expression and dissemination of opinions, and sections 368, 369, 370 and 372 of the Penal Code, and to provide information on the progress made in this respect. Meanwhile, it asks the Government to provide information on the number of persons sentenced under these provisions, the nature of the charges against them and the penalties imposed, and to provide copies of the relevant judicial decisions.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

Article 1(a) of the Convention. The Committee notes that, under section 86 of the Penal Code, any public insult against the Head of State, committed in public, shall be penalized by a sentence of imprisonment of from six months to two years and a fine. Section 368 also penalizes defamation and public insults against the Head of State with a sentence of imprisonment of from three months to one year and a fine. Defamation and insults against elected officials, members of the Congress, Secretaries of State, magistrates of the Supreme Court or county courts are punishable, under sections 369 and 372, with a sentence of imprisonment of from eight days to six months and a fine, and defamation of persons exercising public authority is punishable, under section 370, by a sentence of imprisonment of from eight days to three months and a fine. The Committee further notes that Act No. 6132 on expression and the dissemination of opinions, of 19 December 1962, also provides for the imposition of sentences of imprisonment in cases of insults against the President of the Republic in the form of a sentence of imprisonment of from three months to one year and a fine, or one only of these two penalties (section 26); and a sentence of imprisonment of from six days to three months and a fine, or one only of these two penalties, in the case of insults against courts and tribunals, the armed forces, the police, the legislative assemblies, municipal authorities and other state institutions, members of the Cabinet, one or more members of the legislative houses, one or more public officials, persons exercising public authority, etc. (section 34).

The Committee further notes that, under section 57 of Act No. 224-84 on the prison system, work is compulsory for any detainee convicted by a final decision. As a result of the above, the violation of the provisions referred to above of the Penal Code and of the Act on expression and the dissemination of opinions in cases of insult, defamation and slander could be penalized by a sentence of imprisonment involving compulsory labour. The Committee recalls that Article 1(a) of the Convention prohibits the use of forced or compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a means of political cohesion or education or as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. It requests the Government to provide information on the effect given in practice to sections 368, 369, 370 and 372 of the Penal Code and sections 26 and 34 of the Act on expression and the dissemination of opinions, so that it can assess their scope in the light of Article 1(a) of the Convention. Please also provide information on the number of persons convicted under these provisions, the nature of the charges brought against them and the penalties imposed, and attach copies of relevant court decisions.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

The Committee notes the Government's reports.

Issues arising from the situation of Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic, related to the application of the Conventions on forced labour. In its previous observation, the Committee had asked the Government to provide information on the work of the joint bilateral committee as regards the conditions of hiring of Haitian workers for the cane harvest. It had also asked the Government to report on the progress made concerning the regularization of the status of Haitian workers living and working in the Dominican Republic.

Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the information concerning the harvest which took place in November 1998 to June 1999. The Government refers to the contracts, drawn up in Spanish and Creole, made with Haitian nationals established in the country and those who legally entered the country for the harvest. A total of 12,041 workers were hired. Six labour inspectors were directly assigned to the inspection in the six concerned plantations, and to the supervision of working hours and payment of salaries.

Despite the establishment of the joint bilateral committee made up of representatives of both States to examine the various aspects of Dominican-Haitian relations, the Government indicates that as yet it has not been possible to reach an agreement to regulate the conditions of contract of Haitian workers. High-level official visits to Haiti have only allowed for an initial exchange of basic ideas with respect to labour migration between the two countries.

According to information from the General Directorate of Migration, approximately 400,000 Haitians are living in the Dominican Republic. Only 1,862 of these hold regular residence documents. Since Haitian immigrants fear repatriation, and a number of them lack any identification document, they resisted any comprehensive census, which in turn prevents their regularization.

A pilot programme has been initiated in Valverde Province, by the General Directorate of Migration, with a view to determine with the employers their needs for supplementary workers. As a result, work permits and provisional residence permits for six months have been issued to more than 3,000 Haitians. At the end of that period, these workers will return to their country and will not be allowed to re-enter the Dominican Republic for two months. The programme should be extended to other parts of the country.

The Government further indicates that all sugar mills have been privatized, that the number of workers employed for the sugar harvests has greatly dropped and that many migrant workers of Haitian nationality are now employed in the construction sector and in agriculture. The General Directorate of Migration is actively involved in finding satisfactory solutions and is leading a pilot programme to issue work permits and provisional residence permits to a limited number of Haitian workers, for a limited time, taking into account the employers' needs for supplementary workers. Eventually the programme should be extended to other parts of the country.

The Committee takes due note of this information. With regard to the privatization of all sugar mills, the Committee notes that the Government remains responsible for ensuring the observance, throughout the national territory, of this Convention as well as the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), also ratified by the Dominican Republic. The Committee regrets that little progress has been achieved by the joint bilateral committee and asks the Government to continue to provide information on the work of the committee as regards the conditions of hiring of Haitian workers for the cane harvest.

The Committee also notes that despite efforts with regard to the regularization of the status of Haitians working and living in the Dominican Republic, measures still are at an early stage. For many years, the Committee has been pointing out that the application of the Convention is affected by the uncertainty of the legal status of many workers since such uncertainty makes the workers more vulnerable and may lead to abuse and practices which impair the rights protected by the Convention.

The Committee hopes that the Government will give effect to the recommendations which it has been making for some time regarding the regularization of the status of Haitian workers living and working in the Dominican Republic and that it will report on any progress made.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

The Committee notes the Government's report and the comments on the application of the Convention submitted by the National Trade Union of Agricultural Workers of Sugar and Similar Plantations (SINATRAPLASI), the Trade Union of Cane-Cutters of the Barahona Plantation (SIPICAIBA) and the Union of Agricultural and Similar Plantations' Workers of the Ingenio Barahona (SITRAPLASIB), which were received in a communication of October 1996 a copy of which was sent to the Government in November 1996. The Government sent its comments on the questions raised in a communication received in June 1997. The Committee also notes the report on the matters raised by the above organizations prepared by the Director of the State Sugar Board (CEA).

Issues arising from the situation of Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic, related to the application of the Conventions on forced labour

The above-mentioned organizations submit (in a single document) that the amendments to the legislation, particularly the Labour Code and the various programmes announced by the Government, have led to no significant improvement in the conditions of Haitian workers employed on sugar plantations in the Dominican Republic. They allege that workers assigned to a plantation are not allowed to leave it before the harvest and that those who refuse to obey are brought to order by the plantations' armed guards or soldiers who constantly oversee cane-cutting. In addition, workers who have been living for many years on the plantations are threatened with expulsion if they refuse to work.

The above organizations also allege that only few workers have signed individual work contracts and that, although contracts written in Creole have been introduced, they are unintelligible.

The organizations note, however, that as part of the reform introduced by Decree No. 417/90, the Ministry of Labour has set up delegations for the purpose of ensuring compliance with the terms of the work contract and that plantation overseers have been dismissed for misconduct.

As for the regularization of the situation of Haitian workers living and working in the Dominican Republic, the organizations allege that following the steps taken by the National Migration Directorate to "register" the Haitian population in 1990, the only result has been the expulsions ordered in 1991, and also the expulsion of Haitians who had obtained the temporary work permit authorized by Decree No. 417/90 on expiry of the permit.

In conclusion, the above-mentioned organizations consider that the measures taken are largely ineffective, the more so as they apply only to workers hired since 1991 and exclude the larger group of resident workers who are totally uncertain as to their legal situation.

The Committee notes the Government's comments on these allegations. According to the Government "workers hired for cane-cutting enjoy full freedom of movement, since drastic measures were taken against former practices and that today it would be difficult to assert that such practices are common". The Committee notes that in the report which the Director of the CEA prepared on the issues raised by the trade union organizations, it is stated that, "cooperation from military staff has been confined to escorting convoys of day labourers to and fro between Santo Domingo and Haiti and that in such cases the staff involved speak Creole and wear civilian dress".

The Government indicates that for the sugar harvest which began in November 1996 care was taken to inform the "cutters" about the conditions in which they would perform the tasks of cutting, lifting and transporting cane. The Government indicates that there is full freedom of movement but that a worker who abandons the job for which he was hired is repatriated and that every temporary worker is given a contract drawn up in Spanish and Creole, under supervision of a labour inspector. The Committee notes the contracts in Spanish and Creole sent by the Government.

With regard to the regularization of the status of Haitian workers who have been living and working in the country for some time, the Government states that for the 1996 harvest temporary residence cards were issued for the duration of the harvest to 13,350 Haitians hired by the CEA and that the Migration Directorate has started a procedure for issuing residence cards, permanent or temporary as needed. The Government adds that, with cooperation from the International Migration Organization (IMO) work is under way on the drafting of a new law on migration (a copy of which was sent by the Government) and that IMO technical cooperation has also been obtained for defining and developing a labour migration division in the Ministry of Labour. A joint bilateral committee made up of representatives of both States has been set up to examine the various aspects of Dominican-Haitian relations.

The Committee notes that, with regard to the regularization of the status of Haitians working and living in the Dominican Republic, the information supplied by the Government indicates that the measures are at an early stage, despite the fact that for many years the Committee has been pointing out that the application of the Convention is affected by the uncertainty of the legal status of many workers, since such uncertainty makes the workers more vulnerable and may lead to abuses and practices which impair the rights protected by the Convention.

The Committee hopes that the Government will give effect to the recommendations which it has been making for some time concerning the regularization of the status of Haitian workers living and working in the Dominican Republic and that it will report on any progress made.

The Committee asks the Government to provide information in its next report on the work of the joint bilateral committee as regards the conditions for the hiring of Haitian workers for the cane harvest.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

Further to the recommendations made by the Commission of Inquiry and the Committee's own comments, the Committee asked the Government in its previous observation to provide information on the following points.

1. Regularization of the status of Haitians who have been living and working in the country for some time, and the issuing of identity documents to persons born in the Dominican Republic.

The Committee noted in its observation of 1992 that in 1991 the status of 36,109 people had been legalized, that 55,799 people were listed for registration, 28,289 of whom were in the process of having documents issued and that 9,252 children of Haitian nationals had been registered.

The Committee notes that, according to the information in the Government's report, the situation of 52,727 Haitians working and living in the country has been regularized and 1,548 permanent residence permits have been issued. The Government also indicates that the events in Haiti as from September 1991 produced a continuous flow of Haitian nationals to the Dominican Republic, which has created difficulties for the General Directorate of Migration.

The Committee requests the Government to continue to supply information on the regularization process, including details on the number of people who have been granted work and/or residence permits. The Committee also asks the Government to indicate the number of persons of Haitian origin, born in the Dominican Republic, who have been granted identity documents recognizing this fact.

2. Recruitment.

The Committee asked the Government to provide information on the systems of recruitment and to provide inspection reports containing information on the practical application on the terms of the recruitment of labour, the number and type of infringements recorded and the sanctions imposed.

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government to the effect that, in the latest harvests, recruitment was limited to Haitian nationals living in the country and those who have crossed the border of their own free will, since the situation in Haiti and the decision of the Organization of American States prevented an agreement being reached on the recruitment of labour between the two countries.

The Committee asks the Government to indicate whether any measures have been taken or are envisaged to ensure proper recruitment of Haitian workers for the 1995 sugar harvest by means of the above agreement.

The Committee notes with interest the various inspection reports sent by the Government, which show that a number of penalties have been imposed on the administrations of sugar mills for breaches of the provisions of the Labour Code concerning wages, leave, working hours and, in one case, for resorting to the use of military personnel in the forceable recruitment of Haitian nationals for cane-cutting.

3. Protection by the competent authorities of the rights and freedoms of Haitian workers.

The Committee notes that these measures include the Agreement of February 1992 between the State Sugar Board (CEA), the Federation of Sugar Planters and various workers' unions, under which workers' organizations are involved in cane-weighing and measures are taken to curb speculation of private traders when payment receipts change hands. In this connection the Committee refers the Government to its comments on the application of the Protection of Wages Convention (No. 95). The Committee notes the Government's indication concerning the National Inspection Service as a guarantee that the provisions of the Labour Code are observed in sugar mills, thanks to which, according to the Government, there has been notable and steady progress. The Committee also notes the report of 1994 on the social work conducted by the CEA in the various plantations, supplied by the Government.

The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any other measure taken to this effect.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 83rd ILC session (1996)

1. Further to the recommendations made by the Commission of Inquiry and the Committee's own comments, in its previous observation the Committee asked the Government to provide information on the regularization of the status of Haitians who have been living and working in the country for some time, and on the issuing of identity documents to persons born in the Dominican Republic.

The Committee notes that the Secretary of State for Labour applied to the General Directorate of Migration for the information requested. The Committee notes that the Government's reply contains no information on the matter.

The Committee trusts that the Government will communicate in its next report the information requested.

2. The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the systems of recruitment used in the economic activity sectors which employ Haitian workers, and also to provide inspection reports containing information on the application of the terms of recruitment of labour, the number and type of infringements recorded and the sanctions imposed.

The Committee also requested the Government to indicate whether any measures have been taken or are envisaged to ensure proper recruitment of Haitian workers for the 1995 sugar harvest.

The Government indicates in its report that for the sugar harvest of November-June 1995, recruitment of workers for cane-cutting was restricted to Haitian nationals living in the country and those who have crossed the border of their own free will; that a total of 13,000 Haitians were recruited for the current sugar harvest and that a labour inspector was present at the conclusion of individual agreements, formalizing the recruitment with a written contract printed in Spanish and Creole.

The Government adds that a total of 13 labour inspectors have been assigned directly to the eight sugar refineries working on this harvest, where permanent supervision is maintained with respect to wages, holidays and the length of the working day. The Government also indicates minors are no longer employed and that "criminals" are no longer used in recruitment of Haitian nationals.

The Committee notes that according to the Government the possibility has not yet been envisaged of establishing an agreement between Haiti and the Dominican Republic for recruitment of labourers.

3. The Committee has requested information on the measures taken to ensure the protection by the competent authorities of the rights and freedoms of Haitian workers.

The Government indicates in its report that the labour inspectorate has continued to supervise everything concerning cane-weighing and payment of wages. The Committee notes the report prepared by the State Sugar Board (CEA) in relation to the social work carried out on the plantations.

4. The Committee has also noted the complaint submitted to the Committee on Freedom of Association in October 1995 by the International Union of Workers in the Food, Agriculture, Hotel, Restaurant, Tobacco and Associated Sectors (UITA) and the allegations it contains pertaining to the situation of Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic on matters related to the application of the Conventions on forced labour.

The allegations, submitted by the National Union of Agricultural Workers in Sugar Plantations and Similar Enterprises (SINATRAPLASI), and the Sugar Cutters' Union of the Barahona Mill (SIPICAIBA) refer to restrictions on the right of free movement or repatriation, which soldiers use as a pretext to strip workers of their possessions, frequently on pay-day. The allegations also refer to the destruction of identity documents by soldiers who, furthermore, carry out arbitrary arrests which become more frequent in the period after the sugar harvest when labour is not required.

According to the organizations mentioned, the CEA encourages recruitment of Haitians who have no identity documents, that soldiers take part in this, and that labour contracts are signed without the presence of union representatives. The allegations also refer to irregularities in cane-weighing and to excessively long working days of 15 hours. The SINATRAPLASI and SIPICAIBA allege that despite the adoption of the new Labour Code, in practice no protection exists.

The Committee has also noted that last October a strike of Haitian workers was declared for the purpose of obtaining investigation of the case of 11 workers who disappeared on 28 September. The 11 workers were among the 38 labourers who were conducted to the border by private guards of the Montellano company.

The Committee hopes that the Government will supply information on the questions raised in the allegations, as well as on the measures adopted to ensure respect for the Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

The Committee notes the discussion in the Conference Committee in 1991 concerning the application of Conventions Nos. 95 and 105 by the Dominican Republic, and the report of the mediation mission to the Dominican Republic and Haiti from 10-23 August 1991. The Committee also notes the Government's report.

In its previous observation, the Committee noted the legislative and administrative measures that had been taken, with regard to the matters raised in the various recommendations made by the Commission of Inquiry and the comments of the Committee of Experts, with a view to improving the situation of Haitian workers.

The Committee requested the Government to supply information on the other measures that had been taken to supplement and give effect to the measures which had been adopted respecting the regularisation of the situation of Haitian workers who came to the country to work in the sugar-cane harvest, those who were permanently resident in the country and the descendants of Haitian citizens born in the Dominican Republic as well as the regularisation of the hiring procedure. The Committee also requested the Government to supply information on any measure taken to ensure observance of the terms of employment contracts and of the rights and freedoms of the workers, especially as regards their freedom of movement, their physical safety and moral well-being and their freedom to terminate their employment relationship, as well as their coverage on equal terms by the labour legislation.

1. The regularisation of the status of Haitians who have lived and worked in the country for a given period of time and the issue of identity papers to persons born in the Dominican Republic (paragraph 527 of the report of the Commission of Inquiry). In paragraph 525 of its report, which was published in 1983, the ILO Commission of Inquiry indicated that it is not legitimate for a State to leave in a status of illegality workers whose employment it accepts as necessary to the functioning of the economy, all the more so when they are employed in undertakings belonging to the State. The Commission of Inquiry made recommendations to resolve the situation in view of the fact that many of the violations of international Conventions in question are due to the fact that most of the Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic have no legal status.

The Committee noted in its previous observation that under section 1 of Decree No. 417/90, the General Directorate of Migration was made responsible for the work of regularising the presence of Haitian nationals.

The Committee requested the Government to state whether subsequent texts had been issued to clarify the terms of Decree No. 417/90 respecting the process of regularising the status of the Haitian population resident in the country, especially with regard to the criteria used to regularise their status and the various types of permits issued.

The Committee also requested the Government to supply information on the process of regularisation that had been commenced, and particularly on the results of the census of Haitian population residing in the country and the number of workers who were engaged for the 1990-91 sugar-cane harvest, as well as on the number of permits issued, indicating the sector of activity in which those who obtained permits worked.

Furthermore, the Committee requested the Government to supply information on the measures that had been taken to issue documents to regularise the situation of the descendants of Haitians, who are generally known as "Dominican-Haitians", who were born in the Dominican Republic.

The Committee notes that the Government refers in its report to the provisions of the draft Labour Code respecting the permits that have to be issued by the authorities for work in agro-industrial enterprises. The Committee notes that, according to the data supplied by the Goverment, the census of Haitians in cane-growing areas showed that over 100,000 Haitians were present in those regions and that the number of cane-cutters engaged under contract for the sugar-cane harvest of 1990-91 was 14,597. The Committee notes that, in the report transmitted in May 1991, the Government stated that up to that month the situation of 36,109 persons had been regularised and that 55,799 names were included on the list for the purposes of registration. Documents were being issued for 28,289 persons, while 9,252 children of Haitian nationals had been registered.

The Committee notes the information contained in the report of the mediation mission to the Governments of the Dominican Republic and Haiti, from 10-23 August 1991, according to which, with reference to the regularisation of Haitians, Decree No. 233/91 was adopted on 13 June 1991 by the President of the Republic ordering "the repatriation, at the expense of the State and in the best conditions, of foreigners under 16 years of age who had been working in the cultivation, cutting and transport of sugar-cane, as well as of persons over 60 years of age resident in state or privately-owned "bateyes" following payment of their work".

The Committee notes that, according to the mission's report, repatriation was carried out in an indiscriminate manner, in spite of the fact that the Decree referred only to persons under 16 years of age and over 60 years of age, whose repatriation, moreover in the latter case, would not appear to be justified since they had worked for many years in the Dominican Republic and were, in some cases, pensioners. According to the report, men and women of all ages, including persons born in the Dominican Republic, who either possessed residence permits or had no papers, but who had been in the country for a number of years, were also repatriated. This information was confirmed to the mission by Dominican trade union leaders and non-governmental organisations.

The Committee notes that, according to the mission's report, the adoption of the Decree 233/91 gave rise to violent round-ups and repatriation accompanied, in many cases, by violations of human and employment-related rights. The mission observed the efforts made by the Secretary of State for Labour to moderate the effects of the repatriation measures, although his efforts were obstructed by emigration officials who were only concerned with filling the weekly quota of around 200 repatriations. The Committee notes that, according to the report, the Director of Migration would not receive the mission.

The Committee notes that the mission found that the adoption of Decree No. 233 interrupted the beginnings of the process of the regularisation of the status of Haitian residents in the Dominican Republic, which had commenced under Decree No. 417/90.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the application of Decree No. 417/90 in which reference is made to the regularisation of the status of Haitians who have lived and worked in the country for a certain period and the issue of identity documents to persons who were born in the Dominican Republic. The Committee also requests the Government to supply information on the cases to which it refers in its report of persons whose status has been regularised, indicating the sector of activity in which the persons concerned worked.

2. The hiring procedure. The Committee requested the Government to supply information on the measures that have been taken to put an end to the illegal practices which still persist in the engagement of workers for the sugar-cane harvest, and on the results obtained regarding the application of the recommendations set out in Resolution No. 23/90 of the Secretariat of State for Labour on the use of intermediaries in the engagement of workers. The Committee also requested the Government to supply information on developments in the situation as regards the conclusion of an intergovernmental agreement with the Republic of Haiti on the engagement of Haitian workers for the sugar-cane harvest.

The Committee notes the provisions of the draft Labour Code, and particularly section 148, under which the use of intermediaries or the intervention of military personnel is prohibited in the hiring, transport or recruitment of foreign workers for the sugar industry. The same section provides that the contract of employment must establish the worker's right to unilaterally terminate the contract, to the payment of the full remuneration due in cash and in person to the worker, and the statutory minimum wage. It also provides that the contract must contain guarantees for the weighing of the sugar-cane, recognition of the right of freedom of association and the protection of the social security legislation. The Government adds that up to now no agreement has been concluded with the Republic of Haiti concerning the hiring of Haitian workers for sugar-cane cutting. It refers to the ILO mediation meeting, which initiated negotiations between the Government of Haiti and the Dominican Republic and states that the events in Haiti have made it difficult to continue the negotiations. It also states that, with regard to the hiring of sugar-cane workers, new hiring systems should be introduced for the 1991-92 sugar-cane harvest.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the above systems of hiring introduced for the last harvest (1991-92) and to continue supplying the reports of the relevant inspection services containing data on the effect given in practice to the terms of contracts, the number and type of contraventions reported and the sanctions imposed. The Committee also requests the Government to supply information on the situation regarding hiring in plantations which do not belong to the State Sugar Board (CEA).

In addition, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress made in adopting the Labour Code.

3. Protection by the competent authorities of the rights and freedoms of workers. The Committee requested the Government to take measures to ensure that labour legislation is applied to sugar-cane workers, in accordance with Basic Principle III of the Labour Code, under which labour legislation is of a territorial nature and applied to citizens of the Dominican Republic and aliens without distinction.

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government concerning the registration on 7 May 1991 of the Trade Union of Cane-Cutters of the Barahona Plantation, which is largely composed of Haitian cane-cutters and whose Secretary-General is of Haitian nationality. It also states that some of the officers of the Ozama Plantation Trade Union are of Haitian nationality.

The Committee also requested that measures be taken to set up, in addition, in "bateyes" of the CEA and in private plantations, civil administration structures such as exist in other population centres.

The Committee notes that the division of the national territory is the responsibility of the National Congress and that "bateyes" are located in municipalities in which justices of the peace are responsible for administering justice in relation to civil, penal and labour matters.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether other "bateyes", in addition to the Consuelo plantation, have been declared municipal districts and to supply information on any other measure taken to protect the rights of workers and their families in plantations.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

The Committee notes the discussion in the Conference Committee in 1990 on the application of Conventions Nos. 95 and 105 by the Dominican Republic, as well as the report of the direct contacts mission which, at the request of the Government of the Dominican Republic, visited the country from 3 to 21 January 1991. The Committee also notes the Government's report.

The Committee notes with interest the adoption of Decree No. 417/90, of 15 October 1990, respecting the regularisation of the situation of Haitian citizens in the country, the installation of special labour inspection delegations in sugar-cane plantations in order to enforce the terms of employment contracts and ensure that they are strictly observed, and to monitor that the human rights of Haitians workers are respected. Furthermore, the above Decree establishes an obligation on the part of the State Secretariat for Labour to regularly report to the ILO on the observance of the provisions contained in the Decree and on any matter relating to the protection due to these workers.

I. Employment in sugar-cane plantations

In comments that it has been making since 1984, the Committee has drawn attention to the urgent need to take measures to ensure the observance of the Convention in sugar-cane plantations and to end the abuses committed against workers of Haitian origin, in accordance with the recommendations made in 1983 by the Commission of Inquiry set up to examine the observance of the Convention.

In its previous observation, the Committee referred to three groups of measures of priority importance:

1. The regularisation of the status of Haitians who have lived and worked in the country for a given period of time and the issue of identity papers to persons born in the Dominican Republic (paragraph 527 of the report of the Commission of Inquiry). In paragraph 527 of its report, which was published in 1983, the ILO Commission of Inquiry indicated that it is not legitimate for a State to leave in a status of illegality workers whose employment it accepts as necessary to the functioning of the economy, all the more so when they are employed in undertakings belonging to the State. The Commission of Inquiry made recommendations to resolve the situation in view of the fact of many of the violations of international Conventions in question are due to the fact that most of the Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic have no legal residence status.

The Committee notes section 1 of Decree No. 417/90, by virtue of which:

"The General Directorate of Migration is instructed to continue, with the greatest speed, the work of regularising the presence on our territory of all Haitian nationals and to determine their status as immigrants with temporary residence permits or daily-workers for a fixed period, especially as regards those who work as labourers in the sowing, cultivation, cutting and transport of sugar-cane, and in the bateyes, factories and offices of sugar-cane plantations.

Paragraph.- Persons and other legal entities which use these Haitian citizens as workers, irrespective of the type of work they perform, shall be obliged to register them with the authorities in order to comply with the provisions of the above section. Non-compliance with this obligation shall be punishable with the penalties set out in section 14(b) and (c) of Act No. 95 of 14 April 1939."

The Committee notes that the National Directorate of Migration has taken measures to apply the above Decree, including in particular the organisation of a census of Haitian workers and their families and the preparation of temporary residence permits.

The Committee notes that at the present time it is estimated that some 50,000 thousand Haitians have been registered by the census; this figure is well below the approximate number of Haitians in the Dominican Republic, which is estimated to be more than one million.

The Committee notes that in January work began on the preparation of permits that are to be issued to Haitian citizens who have been registered at the Migration Office on form MH-1 (Haitian Migration), established for this purpose and that the direct contacts mission was able to examine some of these permits, without, at that time, being able to estimate the number of persons who had received such permits. The Committee notes that the permits which have been prepared do not distinguish between temporary and definitive residence.

The Committee notes that Decree No. 417/90 does not refer to the regularisation of the descendants of Haitian citizens who were born in the Dominican Republic.

The Committee has referred in previous comments to the situation of these persons who, by virtue of the law of the Dominican Republic, are Dominican nationals, and to the difficulties encountered by parents of Haitian nationality to register their children born in the Dominican Republic on the Civil Register.

The Committee notes that form MH-1 contains data on the place of birth of the children of registered workers.

The Committee notes the announced intention of the authorities to carry out the census and issue the present permits as a first step which will then make it possible to establish the type of permit that will be issued to persons who have been permanently resident in the country for a long time or who come to work in the sugar-cane harvest, and which will also make it possible to issue documents to persons who were born on the territory of the Dominican Republic.

The Committee requests the Government to state whether subsequent texts have been issued to clarify the terms of Decree No. 417/90 respecting the process of regularising the status of the Haitian population resident in the country, especially with regard to the criteria used to regularise their status and the various types of permits issued.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the process of regularisation that has been launched, and particularly on the results of the census of Haitian population residing in the country and the number of workers who where engaged for the 1990-91 sugar-cane harvest. The Committee also requests the Government to supply information on the number of permits that have been issued, indicating the sector of activity in which those who have obtained permits work.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the measures that have been taken to issue documents to regularise the situation of the descendants of Haitians, who are generally known as "Dominican-Haitians", who were born in the Dominican Republic.

2. The regularisation of the hiring procedure and residence in the country of workers entering the country to work on the sugar-cane harvest (paragraphs 521 and 522). The Committee noted that in so far as the entry of new workers into the country is recognised as being necessary to the operation of the national economy, measures should be taken by the Dominican Government, either within the framework of an inter-governmental agreement or outside it, so that the process operates in an orderly manner and the workers concerned enjoy the necessary safeguards concerning their free choice of employment and their terms and conditions of employment, without the intervention of the armed forces. These measures should include the following:

(a) the determination of the number of workers whose engagement by the various employers would be authorised;

(b) the establishment of placement offices at appropriate locations where such workers seeking employment in the Dominican Republic could be hired for the sugar-cane harvest, and be given a medical examination and issued with the necessary documents (residence and employment permits);

(c) the provision of clear information to the workers concerned on their terms and conditions of employment, by means of individual contracts of employment or a written statement (which should also be available in Creole);

(d) the transportation of the workers to their places of employment.

With reference to the determination of the number of workers whose employment will be authorised and the establishment of placement offices (points (a) and (b)), the Dominican authorities state that there has been an increase in Haitian migration and note the negative impact of this migration, although new workers are required each year to work on the sugar-cane harvest since many of those who arrived in previous years proceed to other sectors of activity which offer better terms and conditions of employment.

The Committee notes that in recent years attempts to conclude an inter-governmental agreement between the Dominican Republic and Haiti on the engagement of Haitian workers for the sugar-cane harvest have failed and that at the present time these workers are engaged directly.

The process of engaging workers for the sugar-cane harvest

In its previous comments, the Committee drew attention to the need to establish placement offices at appropriate locations. In this connection, it notes that four frontier posts have been set up for the engagement of Haitian workers, and that these are located in Pedernales, Jimani, Elias Piña and Dajabón and that officials of the health and migration authorities and of the State Sugar Board (CEA) work together in order to carry out examinations of these workers to detect malaria, to have them fill in the form MH-1 of the General Directorate of Migration, to sign individual employment contracts and to organise their transport to the plantations.

The Committee notes that the use of buses has made it possible to improve the conditions in which the workers are transported to the sugar-cane plantations.

The Committee notes from the report of the direct contacts mission that, through its direct interviews with workers being engaged at the frontier for the sugar-cane harvest, the mission observed that the immense majority of such workers are illegal immigrants who have arrived in the Dominican Republic without identity documents, visas or work permits. Paradoxically, this illegal immigration is carried out in this case with the consent of Dominican authorities and the State Sugar Board.

A. Recruitment in Haiti

The Committee notes the persistence the traditional form of recruitment in Haiti, which is carried out through the intermediary of the so-called "buscones" in return for the payment of a sum of money for each worker recruited.

The Committee notes that although there has been a certain reduction in military involvement in recruitment, the system of seeking workers in Haiti through the so-called "buscones" persists and that it is currently the most important element in the provision of labour to sugar-cane plantations.

The Committee notes the numerous witnesses heard by the direct contacts mission who referred to the deceitful manner (false promises and information as regards wages and other living and working conditions) under which they were recruited in Haiti by so-called "buscones", who in most cases were of Haitian nationality.

The evidence that was gathered all points to the conclusion that the Haitian "buscón" receives a sum of money for each Haitian who is delivered to the CEA's "buscón" at the frontier.

In the military fortress at Jimani, located a couple of kilometers from the frontier post of Malpaso, the direct contacts mission was able to observe that a bus loaded with Haitian workers was being organised by persons dressed as civilians, but who were armed, and who had been responsible for recruitment in Haiti, in some cases 50 kilometers from the frontier, according to the driver. The various types of recruiters, the so-called "buscones", have the power and resources to seek workers in Haiti, where they seem to be able to move freely, which would not appear to be possible without the co-operation of the military authorities in that country, at least those located close to the frontier.

The generalised nature of this system of recruiting workers was confirmed by the testimony of Haitian workers, who were fraudulently persuaded to cross the frontier at Alias Peña, where they waited for one month before being delivered to the CEA's "buscon". Other workers referred to similar cases in Pedernales.

The Committee notes that the activity of the "buscón" is authorised and is currently essential for the engagement of workers and that the "buscones" are given a great deal of independence in the way in which they recruit workers, which leaves room for abuses.

B. Recruitment in the Dominican Republic

"Buscones" are also active in the territory of the Dominican Republic, in various manners. Certain of these persons seek cane-cutters for a sugar-cane plantation, and find them in population centres or in the "bateyes" (living areas) of other plantations, so that workers brought by the CEA have become the objects of trafficking and are displaced towards private plantations or farms. Thus, private employers profit from CEA recruitment without any great cost to themselves and without taking their responsibilities. The same trafficking occurs between different plantations of the State Sugar Board. In order to prevent an exodus of workers to other plantations rural guards have used coercive methods, such as keeping the belongings of the workers (in most cases their clothes) or locking them in when they sleep.

The Committee notes Resolution No. 23/90, of 30 October 1990, of the Secretariat of State for Labour respecting intermediaries in the recruitment of workers, by virtue of which "it is recommended that employers, and in particular employers on sugar-cane plantations, refrain from using intermediaries or from engaging Haitian workers through intermediaries, particularly for temporary work in the national sugar-cane industry; they are urged to engage such workers directly, through public offers of employment brought to the knowledge of those concerned by the press or other means, thus ascertaining the freedom of the worker to accept the employment offered and to sign a written contract setting out his rights and obligations and his ability to return to his country of origin".

The Committee also notes the open attitude shown by the CEA authorities, according to the report of the direct contacts mission, concerning the problems that were raised with regard with the current methods of engaging workers.

The Committee notes, nevertheless, that in most cases workers continue to be engaged by the fraudulent means used by intermediaries known as "buscones" to induce Haitians to work on the sugar-cane harvest. It also notes that the CEA continues to pay intermediaries and observes that these recruitment practices have implications and repercussions that cannot be considered part of a free employment relationship.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the measures that have been taken to put an end to the illegal practices which still persist in the engagement of workers for the sugar-cane harvest, and on the results obtained regarding the application of the recommendations set out in Resolution No.23/90 of the Secretariat of State for Labour on the use of intermediaries in the engagement of workers. The Committee also requests the Government to supply information on developments in the situation as regards the conclusion of an inter-governmental agreement with the Republic of Haiti on the engagement of Haitian workers for the sugar-cane harvest.

With regard to contracts of employment (point (c)), the Committee notes section 2 of Decree No. 417/90, under the terms of which:

"The Secretariat of State for Labour shall establish special labour inspection delegations in all sugar-cane plantations with the objective, inter alia, of enforcing an employment contract, drawn up in Spanish and the language of the worker, in which shall be set out the amount and system of payment of the wages, the hours of work, the rest days, social security, the maximum work-week, the regulations governing the work that may be performed by children over 14 years of age, bonuses and other incentives, and all relevant rights accorded by national law and by the international Conventions and resolutions to which the Republic has subscribed, as well as the conditions in which the work is to be performed.

Paragraph 1. The above contract shall explicitly set out the right of the workers to resign, and thereby to rescind the contract that has been signed, and to move to another workplace or to their country of origin."

The Committee notes the model employment contracts drawn up by the CEA and the Central Romana Corporation Limited, both of which are written in Spanish and Creole. It also notes from the report of the direct contacts mission, that the process of issuing contracts is being carried gradually, that not all the workers interviewed had signed contracts, and that some of those who had believed that these were residence permits.

The Committee also notes that, by virtue of Decree No. 417/90, the State Secretariat for Labour reported that 18 inspectors had been appointed to the labour inspection delegations provided for in the Decree, and that guidelines were issued on 31 December 1990 for their activities.

The Committee notes the information contained in the report of the direct contacts mission concerning the effect that is given in practice to the provisions concerning wages, hours of work, and other conditions of employment of workers employed on sugar-cane plantations. With regard to wages, the Committee refers to its comments in relation to the application of the Protection of Wages Convention, 1949 (No. 95). The Committee notes that hours of work continue to be excessive and that social security is almost non-existent. Despite the fact that contributions are deducted from wages, most workers receive no pension in their old age or, if they do receive a pension, its level does not enable them to subsist. In the event of sickness, the workers receive no medical care or medicaments.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the application of section 2 of Decree No. 417/90 as regards employment contracts and the supervision carried out by the special labour inspection delegations. The Committee requests the Government to supply a copy of the inspection reports made during the 1990-91 sugar-cane harvest, including data on the number of contracts that were concluded for the 1990-91 harvest and the effect given in practice to the terms of the contracts, the number and nature of the violations that have been reported and the penalties imposed.

3. Protection by the competent authorities of the rights and freedoms of workers. The Committee had requested the Government to take the necessary measures to:

(a) prevent by all the means at its disposal the recurrence of round-ups of persons for work in plantations and enforce the application of appropriate sanctions to those responsible.

In its previous comments, the Committee referred to coercive methods of recruitment used through round-ups during the course of the sugar-cane harvest in order to compensate for the lack of workers for the harvest.

The Committee notes that round-ups are no longer used systematically and generally, and that the cases that were reported in the 1989-90 and 1990-91 harvests were isolated ones.

The Committee notes, with reference to the freedom to resign set out explicitly in section 2 (1) of Decree No. 417/90, that many of the workers interviewed stated that in order to prevent workers transferring to other "bateyes", the rural guards kept their belongings (generally their clothing) thereby obliging the workers to remain in the plantation or lose their belongings if they decided to leave. They also stated that, on occasion, if it is suspected that a worker wishes to leave, he is locked in while sleeping. The Committee also notes that during the harvest, military check-points on roads check the occupants of buses in order to find Haitian citizens, who are made to pay in order to be able to continue their journey, irrespective of whether they are returning to Haiti or travelling in the Dominican Republic. This practice forms part of the system of extortion known as "macuteo" through which workers are stripped of the cash and goods that they carry with them.

(b) The Committee also requested the Government to take measures to ensure that labour legislation is applied to sugar-cane workers, in accordance with Basic Principle III of the Labour Code, under which labour legislation is of a territorial nature and applied to citizens of the Dominican Republic and aliens without distinction.

The Committee notes the clear intention shown by the authorities to recognise the application of labour legislation without distinction on grounds of nationality. Nevertheless, various trade union organisations informed the direct contacts mission that foreign nationality had been used to deny the registration of a number of agricultural trade union organisations.

(c) The measures that were requested also included the setting up, in addition, in "bateyes" of the CEA and in private plantations, of civil administration structures such as exist in other population centres.

The Committee notes that the Consuelo Plantation has been declared to be a municipal district, which has make it possible to establish a court to examine cases of violation of penal legislation. The Committee hopes that the Government will take measures towards the recognition of "bateyes" (living areas of plantations) as territorial divisions so that public authorities protect the rights of workers and their families in plantations.

Living conditions in "bateyes"

In paragraph 512 of its report, the Commission of Inquiry referred to the need for the Dominican sugar industry to recruit large numbers of Haitian workers, notwithstanding high unemployment among the country's own rural population, and indicated that this was due in large measure to the low remuneration and poor conditions of work and life on many of the plantations concerned. The Commission added that it is against this background that various measures contrary to the Conventions on forced labour have been taken, both to retain workers on the plantations for the duration of the harvest and, at times of labour shortage, to take workers there against their will.

The Commission stressed the need to pursue a policy aimed at the humanisation of conditions on the plantations, which finds expression, inter alia, in material improvements.

The Committee notes that section 5 of Decree No. 417/90 provides that:

"The national Government, and in particular the State Sugar Board and private enterprises in the sugar industry, in so far as permitted by the available resources, shall continue to carry out, on an increasingly broad scale, programmes in the fields of health, education, food, social security, electrical energy, drinking water and housing for all the workers in the country and particularly for those who work in the cane-fields, "bateyes" and factories of plantations."

The Committee notes that the CEA has initiated some programmes to improve a number of the problems referred to above. It notes, however, that in general the living, health and safety conditions continue to be very bad in the "bateyes".

The Committee requests the Government to report any measure that is taken to improve the living conditions in sugar-cane plantations.

Period between harvests

In paragraph 516 of its report, the Commission of Inquiry recommended that land be set aside on state plantations for cultivation by workers, thus enabling them to supplement their earnings and to meet subsistence needs outside the harvesting period.

The Committee notes that during the low period between harvests, the situation of workers residing on plantations worsens considerably due to lack of earnings. Various workers who were heard by the direct contacts mission referred to the hunger suffered by workers and their families during the months of the low period between harvests. The Committee notes that the Government has not followed up the recommendation to place at the workers' disposal small parcels of land for subsistence crops. The Committee notes that, according to the testimony heard by the direct contacts mission, workers who in their need grow small crops on the lands of the plantations have their produce taken from them by the plantation authorities and, in some cases, the crops are destroyed.

The Committee requests the Goverment to take the necessary measures to give effect to the recommendation that land for cultivation be placed at the disposal of workers who remain on plantations during the periods between the harvests.

The Committee notes with interest the legal and administrative measures that have been taken pursuant to the various recommendations made by the Commission of Inquiry and the comments of the Committee of Experts and which may lead in practice to substantial progress in improving the situation of Haitian workers. The Committee also notes the improvements that have resulted from the demilitarisation of "bateyes", the reduction in the number of round-ups and the use of better means of transport.

The Committee notes nevertheless that there remain problems that merit energetic and sustained action by the authorities. The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the measures that are taken to supplement and make more effective current activities in relation to the regularisation of the situation of Haitian workers who come to the country to work on the sugar-cane harvest, of those who are permanently resident in the country and of the descendants of Haitian citizens who were born in the Dominican Republic, and also to regularise the procedures for the engagement of workers. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on any measure that has been taken to enforce the terms of employment contracts and the rights and freedoms of workers, particularly as regards their freedom of movement, respect for their physical and moral integrity, and their freedom to terminate the employment relationship, as well as the application of the labour legislation under conditions of equality.

II. Other matters

Article 1(c) of the Convention. The Committee referred in previous comments to Act No. 3143, of 11 December 1951, as amended by Act No. 5225 of 1959, under which workers who have not completed their work on the agreed day or in the established time-limits, when they have been paid in advance for such work, are punishable by prison sentences involving compulsory labour.

In its report the Government states that "the national authorities have examined measures to resolve labour disputes occurring in relation to the above Act by administrative or judicial means".

The Committee requests the Government, in order to avoid any ambiguity as regards the application of Act No. 3143, to take the necessary measures to repeal or amend the Act and to report on the progress achieved to this effect.

Article 1 (d). In its previous comments the Committee referred to sections 370, 373, 374, 378 (paragraph 16) and 679 (paragraph 3) of the Labour Code, under which sentences of imprisonment involving compulsory labour may be imposed for participation in strikes. The Government stated in one of its previous reports that the necessary measures had been taken to amend or repeal these sections. The Committee hopes that the above provisions will be amended or repealed as soon as possible so as so ensure that full effect is given to the Convention in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

A. Employment in sugar-cane plantations

In comments made since 1984, the Committee has drawn attention to the need to take measures to ensure the observance of the Convention in sugar-cane plantations and to end the abuses committed against workers of Haitian origin, in accordance with the recommendations made in 1983 by the Commission of Inquiry set up to examine the observance of the Convention.

In October 1988, during a direct contacts mission to the Dominican Republic and Haiti undertaken at the request of the governments of the two countries, the Government of the Dominican Republic reaffirmed its will to take every measure to ensure that the situation of agricultural workers in general, and of those of foreign nationality in particular, responds increasingly to the Conventions it has ratified.

In the observation that it made in 1989, the Committee hoped that this undertaking by the Government would make possible real progress in the implementation of the necessary measures to resolve the problems noted. The problems linked to the fact that workers of Haitian origin are not granted a legal status were particularly brought to light by the round-ups of persons living in the Dominican Republic, made with the assistance of police officers and military personnel in order to remedy the shortage of labour for the cane harvest. The problems were aggravated by renewed immigration that was both illegal and managed by the State Sugar Board (CEA). The persistence of the problems noted emphasised the urgent need for the Government to adopt the measures recommended by the Commission of Inquiry in 1983 and recalled since then by this Committee. Three groups of measures appear of priority importance:

1. The regularisation of the status of Haitians who have lived and worked in the country for a given period of time and the issue of identity papers to persons born in the Dominican Republic (paragraph 527 of the report of the Commission of Inquiry). At the same time, economic promotion measures should make it possible to stabilise the labour force employed on plantations (paragraph 516).

2. The regularisation of the hiring procedure and residence in the country of workers entering the country to work on the sugar-cane harvest (paragraphs 521 and 522). In so far as the entry of new workers into the country is recognised as being necessary to the operation of the economy, measures should be taken by the Dominican Government, either within the framework of an inter-governmental agreement or outside it, so that the process operates in an orderly manner and the workers concerned enjoy the necessary safeguards concerning their free choice of employment and their terms and conditions of employment and so that the role played by the armed forces in this context may be ended. These measures should include the following:

(a) the determination of the number of workers whose engagement by the various employers would be authorised;

(b) the establishment of placement offices at appropriate locations where such workers seeking employment in the Dominican Republic could be hired for the sugar-cane harvest, and be given a medical examination and issued with the necessary documents (residence and employment permits);

(c) the provision of clear information to the workers concerned on their terms and conditions of employment, by means of individual contracts of employment or a written statement (which should also be available in Creole);

(d) the transportation of the workers engaged to their places of employment.

3. Protection by the competent authorities of the rights and freedoms of workers. In this connection, the Government should take the necessary measures to:

(a) prevent by all the means at its disposal the recurrence of round-ups of persons for work in plantations and enforce the application of appropriate sanctions to those responsible for such cases;

(b) ensure that labour legislation is applied to sugar-cane workers, in accordance with Basic Principle III of the Labour Code, under which labour legislation is of a territorial nature and applies to citizens of the Dominican Republic and aliens without distinction; the Committee refers to its comments regarding the labour inspection services under Convention No. 95;

(c) in addition, to set up in "bateyes" of the CEA and in private plantations, civil administration structures such as exist in other population centres. This presence of the public authorities should ensure in a more permanent manner than is possible in real terms through the labour inspectorate the protection of the rights of workers and their families in plantations, since they will no longer be dependent in all the areas of their lives exclusively on the employer's administrators, assisted by the rural police force.

The Committee hoped that the Government would supply detailed information on the measures that it had taken to this effect.

In a report received before the Conference in 1989, the Government indicated that the national authorities were examining possible measures to be adopted in the near future to regularise the recruitment, employment and labour of aliens residing in the country, and particularly to restrict as much as possible the illegal trafficking of Haitian workers and their subsequent exploitation in inadequate living and working conditions. The Government also indicated that it had not been possible to achieve full "Dominicanisation" of the harvesting operations in sugar plantations, despite the great efforts made to attract Dominican and resident Haitian agricultural workers and the measures taken to grant to the latter a legal and social status similar to that enjoyed by Dominicans. No further details have been provided regarding the measures stated to have been taken to grant to resident Haitian workers a legal status and even a status similar to that of Dominicans.

The Committee also notes the discussion held in the Conference Committee in 1989 concerning the application of Conventions Nos. 95 and 105 by the Dominican Republic. The Conference Committee, taking note of the direct contacts which took place in October 1988, expressed its extreme concern over the situation of Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic. It stressed that there had been no progress, either in terms of legislation or practice, on essential points raised over a number of years by the Commission of Inquiry, the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee. The Dominican Republic had requested ILO assistance in order to ensure the application of the Conventions in both its legislation and in practice. In this regard, the Conference Committee considered that special efforts were called for so that the ILO could, as from the 1989-90 harvest, verify the situation and ascertain on the spot the improvements that had been promised but were still awaited. The Conference Committee insisted upon the need for the Government to take the necessary measures, whose implementation should be verified in practice. The Conference Committee also noted that the Government had requested ILO assistance in drawing up an agreement with Haiti concerning the migration of workers. The Conference Committee trusted that any agreement drawn up with ILO assistance would particularly heed the comments of the supervisory bodies. The Conference Committee also trusted that, whether or not such an agreement were concluded, the Government of the Dominican Republic would without delay take the measures necessary to give full effect to the comments made by the ILO supervisory bodies.

A mission of representatives of the Director-General of the ILO was due to visit the Dominican Republic and Haiti in August 1989 to give effect to the request for assistance, as noted by the Conference Committee. This mission, whose mandate was to include the implementation of the measures requested by the supervisory bodies, was cancelled after the Government of the Dominican Republic expressed its disagreement with the orientation of the mission. The Committee notes that since then, and during the whole of the 1989-90 harvest, the Government has failed to take the measures requested by the Conference Committee for the ILO to be able to verify the situation and ascertain on the spot the improvements that have been promised but are still awaited. As regards the measures that, according to the Government's report that was received before the Conference in 1989, were to have been taken in the near future to regularise the recruitment, employment and labour of foreigners resident in the country, the Government has supplied no report since the 1989 Conference on the provisions adopted.

The Committee expresses its extreme concern at the contradiction between the stated intentions of the Government and the absence of any information indicating that real progress has been achieved as regards the implementation of measures to ensure the observance of the Convention.

B. Matters not related to plantations

Article 1(c) of the Convention. The Committee referred in its previous comments to Act No. 3143 of 11 December 1951, as amended by Act No. 5225 of 1959, under which workers who have not completed their work on the agreed day or within the estabished time-limits, when they have been paid in advance for such work, are punishable by prison sentences involving compulsory labour.

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report received before the Conference in 1989 to the effect that Act No. 3143 has fallen into abeyance and that the authorities have envisaged repealing it. The Committee hopes that the Government will soon be able to report that this Act has been repealed.

Article 1(d). With reference to sections 370, 373, 374, 378, paragraph 16, and 679, paragraph 3, of the Labour Code, under which sentences of imprisonment involving compulsory labour may be imposed for participation in strikes, to which the Committee has referred in previous comments, the Government indicated in its report received before the Conference in 1989 that the necessary steps had been taken to amend or repeal these sections. The Committee hopes that the provisions referred to will soon be amended or repealed so as to ensure the observance of the Convention on this point. [The Government is asked to report in detail for the period ending 30 June 1990.]