Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2012, Publicación: 102ª reunión CIT (2013)

Convenio sobre la abolición del trabajo forzoso, 1957 (núm. 105) - Georgia (Ratificación : 1996)

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views. The Committee notes the information on the application in practice of section 226 of the Criminal Code concerning organization of group actions violating public order and participation in such actions provided by the Government, including a copy of the court decision annexed to the Government’s report. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide, in its future reports, information on the application of section 226 in practice, supplying copies of the relevant court decisions.

The Committee previously noted that penal sanctions of correctional work or limitation of freedom may be imposed under section 347 of the Criminal Code for the violation of procedures related to the organization of meetings and manifestations by the organizers of such actions, if the violation entails grave consequences caused by negligence. While noting the Government’s indication that no court decisions have been recorded under the above penal provision during the reporting period, the Committee again requests the Government to provide information on the application of section 347 in practice, as soon as such information becomes available, supplying copies of the court decisions defining or illustrating its scope.

Article 1(d). Penal sanctions involving compulsory labour for participating in strikes. The Committee previously noted that section 348 of the Criminal Code provides for sanctions of correctional work or limitation of freedom as a punishment for the violation of strike procedures by the organizers of strikes, if the violation entails grave consequences caused by negligence. The Committee duly notes the Government’s repeated indication that the above section is applicable to cases of abuse of the right to strike, if such abuse has caused “serious damage”, which means any situation in which human life and health, natural environment or property are damaged. The Government adds that this section “implicitly states” that it cannot be applied to a peaceful strike. It also reiterates that no court decisions have been recorded under this penal provision during the reporting period. The Committee observes, however, that the provision of section 348 is worded in terms broad enough to raise questions of its conformity with the Convention.

Referring to the explanations contained in paragraphs 313–315 of its 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions concerning rights at work, the Committee reiterates its hope that measures will be taken with a view to amending section 348 of the Criminal Code, so as to ensure, both in legislation and in practice, that no penalties involving compulsory labour can be imposed for the mere fact of organizing or peacefully participating in strikes, in order to bring legislation into conformity with Article 1(d) of the Convention. Pending the adoption of such measures, the Committee again requests the Government to provide information on the application of section 348 in practice, as soon as such information becomes available, supplying copies of the relevant court decisions and indicating the penalties imposed.