Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2015, Publicación: 105ª reunión CIT (2016)

Convenio sobre la abolición del trabajo forzoso, 1957 (núm. 105) - Bulgaria (Ratificación : 1999)

Article 1(a) and (c) of the Convention. Penal sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views and for breaches of labour discipline. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that despite the Government’s indication that the voluntary nature of prison labour would be introduced in the new legislation, section 96(1) of the new Implementation of Penal Sanctions and Detention in Custody Act, 2009, provides that persons deprived of their liberty shall be obliged to perform the work assigned to them by the prison administration, the non-compliance with this obligation being punishable with disciplinary sanctions under sections 100(2) (1 and 5) and 101 of the Act. The Committee therefore observed that, pursuant to the above legislative provisions of the new Act, convicted prisoners are obliged to perform prison labour under the menace of a penalty. In this regard, the Committee noted that several provisions of the Penal Code provide for sanctions of imprisonment which can therefore involve compulsory prison labour in situations that may fall within the scope of:

• -Article 1(a) of the Convention, for expressing political views (sections 108(1) for the propagation of “anti-democratic ideology”; section 164 for dissension on religious grounds by speech, press, action or otherwise; section 166 for using religion and church in a propaganda against authorities, by speech, press, action or otherwise; and section 174(a)(2) for conducting a public assembly, meeting or manifestation, in violation of legislation); and
• -Article 1(c) of the Convention, for breaches of labour discipline (section 107 for creating difficulties or disorder in the functioning of industry, transport, agriculture or other branches of the economy or individual enterprises, by obstructing their normal work or by non-performing regular duties; and section 228(1) for issuing poor-quality, non-standard or incomplete products).

The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the application of the above provisions of the Penal Code in practice.

In this regard, the Government refers to the information provided by the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office of Cassation according to which, in 2011, only one person was imposed a penalty of six months of imprisonment, under section 174(a)(2) of the Penal Code, but that the enforcement of the penal sanction was suspended for a period of three years. The Government adds that in this particular case the penalty should not be served effectively within a prison establishment. Furthermore, the report made by the Chief Directorate for Execution of Penalties with the Ministry of Justice does not identify any person serving an imprisonment sentence under the above sections of the Penal Code.

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government. However, the Committee recalls that Article 1(a) and (c) of the Convention prohibit the use of compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour, as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system or for breaches of labour discipline. It draws the attention of the Government to the fact that the above penal provisions are worded in terms broad enough to lend themselves to the application as a means of punishment for peacefully expressing political views or for breaches of labour discipline and, in so far as they are enforceable with sanctions of imprisonment which can involve compulsory labour, they may fall within the scope of the Convention. The Committee hopes that the Government will review its national legislation in the light of the above clarifications so that the voluntary nature of prison labour is expressly provided for in its national legislation and no penal sanctions involving compulsory prison labour may be imposed on persons for expressing political views or for breaches of labour discipline, thereby ensuring conformity with the Convention. In the meantime, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the application of sections 107, 108(1), 164, 166, 174(a)(2) and 228 of the Penal Code in practice, including copies of court decisions defining or illustrating their scope as well as the sanctions applied.