Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2008, publiée 98ème session CIT (2009)

Convention (n° 29) sur le travail forcé, 1930 - Bulgarie (Ratification: 1932)

The Committee has noted the Government’s reply to its earlier comments. It has noted, in particular, the detailed information on the application in practice of the Law on combating trafficking in human beings of 20 May 2003, as well as the information on the various measures taken by the Government in accordance with the National Programme to Combat Trafficking in Human Beings.

Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention. Work of prisoners for private individuals, companies or associations. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to section 61 of the Execution of Punishments Act, which allows prisoners to work for trading companies, other legal entities and individual proprietorships, under the conditions provided for by the Minister of Justice. It recalled that, to be compatible with Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention, which expressly prohibits convicted prisoners from being hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations, such work should be carried out voluntarily and in conditions approximating a free employment relationship; this necessarily requires the formal and informed consent of the persons concerned, as well as further guarantees and safeguards covering the essential elements of a free labour relationship, such as wages and social security, etc. (see paragraphs 54–61 and 98–122 of the Committee’s General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour).

The Committee noted that section 38(a) of the Execution of Punishment Act and section 66(1) of the Execution of Punishment Rules provide for an obligation of prisoners to perform work assigned to them by the prison administration, and section 76 of the Act imposes disciplinary sanctions for the non-performance of the obligation to work or other obligations by the prisoners. The Committee notes that the obligation to work enforceable with the disciplinary sanctions is also provided for in section 10(1) and (2) of Ordinance No. 5 of the Ministry of Justice, of 21 March 2006, on the conditions and procedures relating to work performed by incarcerated persons, which was supplied by the Government with its previous report. It therefore appears from the above legislative provisions that, as a general rule, convicted prisoners are obliged to perform prison labour, even if they have the right to be given suitable work, in accordance with sections 24(1) and 64 of the Execution of Punishment Act.

The Committee has noted the Government’s repeated indications in its reports that performing labour is a right of prisoners, and that the work of prisoners both inside and outside prison premises is voluntary. The Government also indicates that, in practice, disciplinary sanctions for refusal to work in prisons are not applied. The Committee has noted with interest the Government’s statement in its 2006 report that section 38(a) of the Execution of Punishment Act referred to above is going to be amended and that the principle of voluntary nature of prison labour will be introduced in the forthcoming amendments of the Execution of Punishment Act.

The Committee requests the Government to communicate a copy of amendments to the Execution of Punishment Act, as soon as they are adopted. It also requests the Government to supply a copy of a Model Agreement concluded by the State Enterprise “Prison Work Fund” and a private company concerning the use of prison labour, which was referred to by the Government as attached to its report, but has not been received in the ILO.