ILC87 - Report of the Committee on the Application of Standards (...continued)

ILO is a specialized agency of the United Nations

87th Session
Geneva, June 1999

Report of the Committee on the Application of Standards (...continued)

Discussion in Plenary
General report

C. REPORTS ON RATIFIED CONVENTIONS (STATES MEMBERS)
(Article 22 of the Constitution)

Reports received as at 17 June 1999

The table published in the Report of the Committee of Experts, page 578, should be brought up to date in the following manner:

Note: First reports are indicated in parentheses. Paragraph numbers indicate a modification in the lists of countries mentioned in Part One (General Report) of the Report of the Committee of Experts.

Bangladesh	11 reports requested

* All reports received: Conventions Nos. 1, 27, 29, 45, 59, 81, 87, 96, 105, 107, 111
Barbados	17 reports requested

* 15 reports received: Conventions Nos. 5, 26, 29, 81, 87, 98, 100, 105, 108, 111, 115, 122, 135, 144, 147 * 2 reports not received: Conventions Nos. 7, 19
Belize	7 reports requested

*(Paragraph 197)* * All reports received: Conventions Nos. 5, 8, 29, 87, 88, 99, 108
Cameroon	21 reports requested

* 12 reports received: Conventions Nos. 3, 9, 10, 19, 29, 33, 81, 87, 98, 105, 111, 131 * 9 reports not received: Conventions Nos. 5, 16, 45, 100, 108, 122, 123, 135, 146
Cape Verde	3 reports requested

*(Paragraph 197)* * All reports received: Conventions Nos. 29, 100, 118
China - Hong Kong Special Administrative Region	11 reports requested

* All reports received: Conventions Nos. (2), (5), (8), (29), (45), (59), (87), (108), (122), (142), (147)
Congo	4 reports requested

*(Paragraph 197)* * 2 reports received: Conventions Nos. 29, 87 * 2 reports not received: Conventions Nos. 5, 95
Costa Rica	18 reports requested

* All reports received: Conventions Nos. 1, 8, 29, 45, 81, 87, 88, 96, 100, 111, 117, 120, 122, 129, 130, 144, 147, 169
Cyprus	14 reports requested

*(Paragraph 193)* * All reports received: Conventions Nos. 23, 29, 44, 45, 87, 88, 92, 100, 111, 122, (135), 142, (147), (171)
Dominica	7 reports requested

*(Paragraph 197)* * All reports received: Conventions Nos. 8, 26, 29, 87, 97, 100, 108
France	29 reports requested

* 15 reports received: Conventions Nos. 8, 29, 35, 37, 44, 87, 88, 92, 96, 108, 118, 122, 133, 136, 138 * 14 reports not received: Conventions Nos. 27, 36, 38, 45, 82, 100, 126, 129, 137, 139, 142, 144, 146, 147
Ghana	28 reports requested

* 16 reports received: Conventions Nos. 1, 8, 22, 26, 45, 58, 59, 74, 87, 94, 96, 98, 105, 108, 119, 120 * 12 reports not received: Conventions Nos. 29, 30, 69, 88, 92, 100, 103, 111, 117, 148, 150, 151
Hungary	15 reports requested

* All reports received: Conventions Nos. 27, 29, 45, 87, 88, 100, 122, 127, 129, 136, 142, 148, 154, 155, 167
Iraq	24 reports requested

* 14 reports received: Conventions Nos. 1, 19, 30, 100, 105, 108, 111, 118, 122, 135, 136, 138, 142, 167 * 10 reports not received: Conventions Nos. 8, 16, 27, 29, 88, 137, 144, 147, 152, 153
Israel	14 reports requested

* All reports received: Conventions Nos. 1, 29, 30, 87, 88, 91, 92, 96, 100, 117, 122, 136, 142, (147)
Kenya	7 reports requested

*(Paragraph 197)* * 5 reports received: Conventions Nos. 27, 29, 45, 129, 142 * 2 reports not received: Conventions Nos. 2, 88
Latvia	33 reports requested

*(Paragraph 193)* * 18 reports received: Conventions Nos. 3, 5, 13, 87, 98, 105, 106, (111), 115, (122), (129), (132), (135), (144), 150, (151), (154), (158) * 15 reports not received: Conventions Nos. 7, 8, 9, 16, 19, (81), 100, 108, 119, 120, 131, 142, 148, 149, (155)
Liberia	17 reports requested

*(Paragraphs 186 and 197)* * 11 reports received: Conventions Nos. 22, 29, 53, 58, 87, 92, 98, 105, 111, 112, 114 * 6 reports not received: Conventions Nos. 23, 55, 108, 113, (133), 147
Madagascar	13 reports requested

* 9 reports received: Conventions Nos. 5, 26, 81, 87, 117, 119, 120, 122, 129 * 4 reports not received: Conventions Nos. 29, 100, 111, 118
Malawi	9 reports requested

* All reports received: Conventions Nos. 26, 45, 81, 98, 99, 100, 111, 129, 144
Malaysia	5 reports requested

* All reports received: Conventions Nos. 29, 81, 88, 98, 119
Mauritania	12 reports requested

*(Paragraph 197)* * 3 reports received: Conventions Nos. 87, 118, 122 * 9 reports not received: Conventions Nos. 5, 19, 29, 33, 58, 84, 91, 96, 112
Republic of Moldova	11 reports requested

*(Paragraphs 186 and 193)* * 9 reports received: Conventions Nos. (81), (87), (88), (95), (98), (105), (111), (122), (135) * 2 reports not received: Conventions Nos. (117), (144)
Morocco	19 reports requested

* All reports received: Conventions Nos. 2, 26, 27, 29, 30, 45, 81, 98, 99, 100, 105, 111, 119, 122, 129, 136, 146, 147, 158
Nigeria	16 reports requested

*(Paragraphs 186 and 193)* * 9 reports received: Conventions Nos. 19, 45, 58, 59, 81, 87, 98, (144), 155 * 7 reports not received: Conventions Nos. 8, 26, 29, 88, 100, 105, 133
Panama	18 reports requested

* All reports received: Conventions Nos. 8, 27, 29, 30, 45, 87, 88, 94, 96, 100, 108, 110, 111, 114, 117, 122, 159, (160)
Paraguay	12 reports requested

* 5 reports received: Conventions Nos. 60, 87, 119, 120, 169 * 7 reports not received: Conventions Nos. 1, 29, 30, 59, 100, 117, 122
Philippines	11 reports requested

*(Paragraph 197)* * 10 reports received: Conventions Nos. 17, 19, 87, 88, 100, 110, 118, 122, 144, 157 * 1 report not received: Convention No. 59
Russian Federation	11 reports requested

* All reports received: Conventions Nos. 27, 29, 45, 47, 87, 95, 100, 108, 122, 142, 147
Senegal	10 reports requested

*(Paragraph 197)* * 6 reports received: Conventions Nos. 26, 29, 87, 100, 102, 111 * 4 reports not received: Conventions Nos. 5, 96, 117, 122
Seychelles	11 reports requested

*(Paragraphs 193 and 197)* * 9 reports received: Conventions Nos. 2, 5, 8, 26, 29, 58, 99, 108, (149) * 2 reports not received: Conventions Nos. 87, 105
Slovakia	14 reports requested

* All reports received: Conventions Nos. 1, 27, 29, 34, 45, 87, 88, 100, 122, 130, 136, 142, 161, 167
Sri Lanka	14 reports requested

* All reports received: Conventions Nos. 5, 8, 29, 45, 81, 87, 96, 98, 100, 103, (108), 131, 135, 160
Swaziland	7 reports requested

* All reports received: Conventions Nos. 29, 45, 59, 87, 96, 100, 111
Tajikistan	18 reports requested

*(Paragraph 197)* * 15 reports received: Conventions Nos. 27, 29, 45, 47, 87, 92, 98, 103, 108, 111, 122, 126, 133, 142, 147 * 3 reports not received: Conventions Nos. 100, 119, 120
United Republic of Tanzania	12 reports requested

* 9 reports received: Conventions Nos. 29, 59, 98, 105, 131, 134, 135, 144, 152 * 3 reports not received: Conventions Nos. 84, 137, 142
Tanzania - Tanganyika	4 reports requested

* 3 reports received: Conventions Nos. 81, 88, 108 * 1 report not received: Convention No. 45
Turkey	13 reports requested

* All reports received: Conventions Nos. 26, 45, 58, 59, 87, 88, 95, 96, 98, 99, 100, 122, 142
Uganda	6 reports requested

*(Paragraph 197)* * All reports received: Conventions Nos. 5, 17, 29, 45, 81, 122
Yemen	20 reports requested

* 19 reports received: Conventions Nos. 14, 16, 19, 29, 58, 59, 81, 87, 98, 100, 105, 111, 122, 131, 132, 135, 156, 158, (159) * 1 report not received: Convention No. 94

Grand Total A total of 2,036 reports were requested, of which 1,455 reports (71.43 per cent) were received.

D. STATISTICAL TABLE OF REPORTS RECEIVED ON RATIFIED CONVENTIONS
AS AT 17 JUNE 1999
(Article 22 of the Constitution)


Period	Reports requested	Reports received at the date requested		Reports received in time for the session of the Committee		Reports received in time for the session of the Conference

		Number	Percentage	Number	Percentage	Number	Percentage

1931-1932	447	--	--	406	90.8	423	94.6
1932-1933	522	--	--	435	83.3	453	86.7
1933-1934	601	--	--	508	84.5	544	90.5
1934-1935	630	--	--	584	92.7	620	98.4
1935-1936	662	--	--	577	87.2	604	91.2
1936-1937	702	--	--	580	82.6	634	90.3
1937-1938	748	--	--	616	82.4	635	84.9
1938-1939	766	--	--	588	76.8	--	--
1943-1944	583	--	--	251	43.1	314	53.9
1944-1945	725	--	--	351	48.4	523	72.2
1945-1946	731	--	--	370	50.6	578	79.1
1946-1947	763	--	--	581	76.1	666	87.3
1947-1948	799	--	--	521	65.2	648	81.1
1948-1949	806	134 ¹	16.6	666	82.6	695	86.2
1949-1950	831	253	30.4	597	71.8	666	80.1
1950-1951	907	288	31.7	507	77.7	761	83.9
1951-1952	981	268	27.3	743	75.7	826	84.2
1952-1953	1026	212	20.6	840	81.8	917	89.3
1953-1954	1175	268	22.8	1077	91.7	1119	95.2
1954-1955	1234	283	22.9	1063	86.1	1170	94.8
1955-1956	1333	332	24.9	1234	92.5	1283	96.2
1956-1957	1418	210	14.7	1295	91.3	1349	95.1
1957-1958	1558	340	21.8	1484	95.2	1509	96.8
1958-1959	995 ²	200	20.4	864	86.8	902	90.6
1958-1960	1100	256	23.2	838	76.1	963	87.4
1959-1961	1362	243	18.1	1090	80.0	1142	83.8
1960-1962	1309	200	15.5	1059	80.9	1121	85.6
1961-1963	1624	280	17.2	1314	80.9	1430	88.0
1962-1964	1495	213	14.2	1268	84.8	1356	90.7
1963-1965	1700	282	16.6	1444	84.9	1527	89.8
1964-1966	1562	245	16.3	1330	85.1	1395	89.3
1965-1967	1883	323	17.4	1551	84.5	1643	89.6
1966-1968	1647	281	17.1	1409	85.5	1470	89.1
1967-1969	1821	249	13.4	1501	82.4	1601	87.9
1968-1970	1894	360	18.9	1463	77.0	1549	81.6
1969-1971	1992	237	11.8	1504	75.5	1707	85.6
1970-1972	2025	297	14.6	1572	77.6	1753	86.5
1971-1973	2048	300	14.6	1521	74.3	1691	82.5
1972-1974	2189	370	16.5	1854	84.6	1958	89.4
1973-1975	2034	301	14.8	1663	81.7	1764	86.7
1974-1976	2200	292	13.2	1831	83.0	1914	87.0
-1977	1529 ³	215	14.0	1120	73.2	1328	87.0
-1978	1701	251	14.7	1289	75.7	1391	81.7
-1979	1593	234	14.7	1270	79.8	1376	86.4
-1980	1581	168	10.6	1302	82.2	1437	90.8
-1981	1543	127	8.1	1210	78.4	1340	86.7
-1982	1695	332	19.4	1382	81.4	1493	88.0
-1983	1737	236	13.5	1388	79.9	1558	89.6
-1984	1669	189	11.3	1286	77.0	1412	84.6
-1985	1666	189	11.3	1312	78.7	1471	88.2
-1986	1752	207	11.8	1388	79.2	1529	87.3
-1987	1793	171	9.5	1408	78.4	1542	86.0
-1988	1636	149	9.0	1230	75.9	1384	84.4
-1989	1719	196	11.4	1256	73.0	1409	81.9
-1990	1958	192	9.8	1409	71.9	1639	83.7
-1991	2010	271	13.4	1411	69.9	1544	76.8
-1992	1824	313	17.1	1194	65.4	1384	75.8
-1993	1906	471	24.7	1233	64.6	1473	77.2
-1994	2290	370	16.1	1573	68.7	1879	82.0
-1995	1252 ⁴	479	38.2	824	65.8	988	78.9
-1996	1806 ⁵	362	20.5	1145	63.3	1413	78.2
-1997	1927	553	28.7	1211	62.8	1438	74.6
-1998	2036	463	22.7	1264	62.1	1455	71.4
¹ First year for which this figure is available. ² As a result of a decision by the Governing Body, detailed reports were requested as from 1958-59 until 1976 only on certain ratified Conventions. ³ As a result of a decision by the Governing Body (November 1976), detailed reports were requested as from 1977 until 1994, according to certain criteria, at yearly, two-yearly or four-yearly intervals. ⁴ As a result of a decision by the Governing Body (November 1993), detailed reports on only five ratified Conventions were exceptionaly requested in 1995. ⁵ As a result of a decision by the Governing Body (November 1993), reports are now requested, according to certain criteria, at yearly, two-yearly or five-yearly intervals.

II. OBSERVATIONS AND INFORMATION CONCERNING THE APPLICATION OF CONVENTIONS
IN NON-METROPOLITAN TERRITORIES (ARTICLES 22 AND 35 OF THE CONSTITUTION)

A. Information concerning Certain Territories

France (St. Pierre and Miquelon). Since the meeting of the Committee of Experts, the Government has sent replies to all of the Committee's comments.

B. REPORTS ON RATIFIED CONVENTIONS (NON-METROPOLITAN TERRITORIES)
(Articles 22 and 35 of the Constitution)

Reports received as at 17 June 1999

The table published in the Report of the Committee of Experts, page 610, should be brought up to date in the following manner:

Note: Paragraph numbers indicate a modification in the lists of countries mentioned in Part One (General Report)
of the Report of the Committee of Experts.

France	64 reports received: 156 requested
French Polynesia	30 reports requested
* 17 reports received: Conventions Nos. 5, 13, 19, 29, 45, 82, 87, 96, 100, 108, 111, 115, 120, 129, 145, 146, 147 * 13 reports not received: Conventions Nos. 9, 16, 37, 38, 44, 53, 69, 73, 88, 122, 125, 126, 142
French Southern and Antarctic Territories	8 reports requested
* 1 report received: Convention No. 134 * 7 reports not received: Conventions Nos. 8, 22, 73, 87, 108, 146, 147
St. Pierre and Miquelon	16 reports requested
*(Paragraph 197)* * All reports received: Conventions Nos. 5, 29, 35, 44, 45, 82, 87, 88, 96, 100, 108, 111, 122, 129, 142, 147
Netherlands	12 reports received: 29 requested
Aruba	23 reports requested
* 6 reports received: Conventions Nos. 8, 17, 29, 45, 129, 138 * 17 reports not received: Conventions Nos. 9, 11, 25, 69, 74, 87, 88, 94, 95, 101, 122, 135, 137, 142, 145, 146, 147
United States	All reports received: 5 requested
American Samoa	1 report requested
* All reports received: Convention No. 147
Guam	1 report requested
* All reports received: Convention No. 147
Northern Mariana Islands	1 report requested
* All reports received: Convention No. 147
Puerto Rico	1 report requested
* All reports received: Convention No. 147
United States Virgin Islands	1 report requested
* All reports received: Convention No. 147

Grand Total A total of 293 reports were requested, of which 162 (55.10 per cent) were received.

III. SUBMISSION TO THE COMPETENT AUTHORITIES OF THE CONVENTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ADOPTED BY THE INTERNATIONAL LABOUR CONFERENCE (ARTICLE 19 OF THE CONSTITUTION)

Observations and Information

(a) Failure to submit

The Worker members referred to paragraphs 231 and 232 of the report of the Committee of Experts regarding the obligation to submit adopted instruments to the competent authorities. They emphasized that this obligation constituted a fundamental mechanism of the ILO system. Its effect was to reinforce the link between the ILO and national authorities, to promote the ratification of Conventions and to stimulate tripartite dialogue at the national level. The Committee of Experts had to set out in detail the nature of this obligation as well as the procedures to be complied with and to insist that submission did not entail an obligation on the part of governments to propose the ratification of Conventions or to accept the Recommendations examined. The Worker members shared the great concern expressed by the Committee of Experts in the face of the significant accumulated delays of some countries and the difficulties in overcoming this problem. It was therefore desirable that the Committee insist that the governments comply with this obligation and that it bring to the governments' attention that ILO technical assistance was available to them.

The Employer members recalled that, during the general discussion, they had drawn attention to the obligation of submission as the first obligation arising out of the adoption of an instrument by the Conference. Member States were required to submit such instruments to the competent authorities, which normally consisted of the parliament, within 12 months of their adoption, or at the latest within 18 months. In its General Report, the Committee of Experts had provided detailed explanations of what was required of member States in this respect, of the importance of the submission of international labour standards to the competent authorities and of the obligations which did not arise out of submission. The Employer members expressed support for the comments of the Committee of Experts in this respect. The countries listed in paragraph 231 had not provided information showing that the instruments adopted by the Conference at its last seven sessions had been submitted to the competent authorities. The considerable number of countries mentioned showed the extent of the problems related to compliance with this constitutional obligation. The Employer members regretted this situation and placed emphasis on the importance of complying with the obligation of submission.

A Government representative of Cambodia recalled that, although his country had first become a Member of the ILO in 1969, this relationship had been suspended between 1975 and 1993 in view of the rule by the genocidal regime of Pol Pot and the civil war. Cambodia had only resumed its participation in the International Labour Conference in 1994. Since that date, his country had never failed to submit the instruments adopted by the Conference to the competent authorities, and firstly to the Government. It had regularly informed the Committee of Experts about this submission. He therefore expressed surprise that the Committee of Experts had not received the information. Copies of the relevant reports would be sent to the Office once again. However, he regretted to note that his Government had so far not approved any of the instruments which had been submitted. The reason for the delay in the submission process was the large number of urgent tasks which needed to be carried out, including the holding of the 1998 general election in rather difficult circumstances. He undertook to inform the Office of any further developments with regard to the above instruments without delay. He added that his country endeavoured to discharge all its obligations as a Member of the ILO, particularly in relation to the application of fundamental principles and rights at work. Although Cambodia had only currently ratified five Conventions, including Convention No. 29, a proposal forwarded by the Government for the ratification of six other core Conventions and Convention No. 150 had recently been adopted by the National Assembly. It was to be hoped that it would also be approved by the Senate in the near future.

A Government representative of the Central African Republic said that his Government recognized the pertinence and relevance of the observations made by the Committee of Experts and everything was being done to ensure that the constitutional obligation to submit Conventions and Recommendations to the competent authorities within 12 months or, in exceptional cases, 18 months, was respected.

The submission procedure was under way for the instruments adopted by the Conference from 1979 to 1994, and the instruments adopted at the 83rd Session had been put before the Council of Ministers for consideration and adoption. In addition, most of the instruments adopted between the 65th and 85th Sessions of the Conference had been put up for ratification. The Prevention of Major Industrial Accidents Convention, 1993 (No. 174), and the Part-Time Work Convention, 1994 (No. 175), had already been ratified. The delays in submitting instruments to the competent authorities were due to the socio-political crises that had occurred in the Central African Republic in 1996 and 1997, which had resulted in a bottleneck in the functioning of its institutions and had seen the installation of a new Parliament, which meant sending back to the technical departments all the cases pending before Parliament. The texts were now following the usual procedure. He concluded by stressing that his country would take the necessary measures to make good the delays in submitting instruments to the competent authorities and relied on the understanding of the Committee.

A Government representative of Haiti drew attention to the remarks he had made in his previous intervention and said that a compendium of reports submitted to the competent authority had been prepared and transmitted to the employers' and workers' organizations and the Committee of Experts. In addition, a similar compendium was being prepared for 1999 and would shortly be transmitted to the Committee of Experts.

A Government representative of Honduras said that her country had noted the recommendation by the Committee of Experts and the National Congress was already taking measures in that regard. She took the opportunity to report that, for the first time in four years, the Government had responded in the nine reports that had been requested, thus showing its willingness to meet its obligations to the ILO.

A Government representative of Papua New Guinea explained that the failure of her country to comply with its obligations for the submission to the competent authorities of the instruments adopted since the 66th Session of the Conference was due to the severe resource constraints suffered by the Ministry of Labour. In view of these constraints, the Ministry had submitted an urgent request for ILO assistance in this matter. In conclusion, she emphasized that her country appreciated and acknowledged its constitutional obligations and always endeavoured to fulfil them with the limited resources available.

A Government representative of the Seychelles informed the Committee of the problems experienced by his country in fulfilling its obligations under the ILO Constitution. He also expressed gratitude for the provision of technical support, as a result of which a government official had been able to attend a training course in Turin. As a result, it had been possible to put into place the appropriate machinery for tripartite consultation and the submission of international labour standards to the competent authorities. A national Tripartite Employment and Labour Council had been established to discuss issues related to standards. He also informed the Committee that a recent meeting of the Cabinet of Ministers had approved the ratification of the four core Conventions still to be ratified by his country, namely Conventions Nos. 98, 100, 111 and 138. It had also approved the ratification of Conventions Nos. 148, 150 and 151. Finally, the Cabinet had approved the submission to the National Assembly of the instruments adopted at the 63rd and 64th Sessions of the Conference. He therefore expressed his conviction that his country would do its utmost to honour its obligations under the ILO Constitution.

A Government representative of Swaziland stated that his country was aware of its obligations to submit newly adopted instruments to the competent authorities and to inform the Office of their submission. He expressed concern at the growing number of countries which failed to comply with this obligation, which endangered one of the fundamental principles of the Organization and had such an important bearing on the functioning of the supervisory system. In relation to the reference made to the failure of his country to provide information on the submission of these instruments to the competent authorities, he noted that these instruments had been submitted to the Cabinet and that the Director-General had been duly informed in January 1998. He assured the Committee that all the instruments would be submitted to Parliament, which was the ultimate competent authority in the country, and that the Director-General would be duly informed.

A Government representative of the Syrian Arab Republic referring to the reference made in the report of the Committee of Experts that no information had been provided concerning the submission to the competent authorities of the Conventions and Recommendations adopted at the last seven sessions of the Conference, stated that the Office had been informed of all the measures taken by his Government to comply with its obligations under article 19 of the Constitution. A communication had been sent to the Office on 20 May 1999 in reply to the comments made by the Committee of Experts on certain Conventions. This was the third occasion on which such a letter had been sent. If it had not been received, he could provide a copy to the secretariat. ILO Conventions and Recommendations were submitted to the competent authorities in his country and were examined by employers' and workers' organizations to ascertain any divergencies with the national legislation. The findings of this examination were submitted to the tripartite commission which had been established in accordance with Convention No. 144, which had been ratified by his country. A report was subsequently drawn up and submitted to a commission chaired by the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Following their examination, the instruments which were deemed suitable were submitted to Committee No. 1 in the Labour Ministry. The Cabinet and the President's Office then examined the instruments to ensure that they did not have any financial implications or contain any provisions which might disrupt public order. Instruments of which the ratification was deferred would be submitted to the competent authorities at a later stage. After due consideration had been given to the subject, suitable instruments followed the normal procedures and the Office was informed of the steps which had been taken. The Government played an important role in decisions concerning the ratification of certain Conventions. He acknowledged that this might conflict with some of the comments made by the Committee of Experts. However, he noted that a seminar had been held in Damascus to examine in greater detail the issue of ILO standards in the Syrian Arab Republic. The participants had included representatives of employers' and workers' organizations, lawyers, representatives of the Ministries of Justice and Foreign Affairs. The seminar had been very successful and had held an interesting discussion concerning the conflicts in views between the Government and the Committee of Experts. The conclusion was that all the instruments adopted at the Conference had to be submitted to the competent authorities, namely Parliament, through the Council of Ministers.

The Employer members noted that, with the exception of the Government representative of the Syrian Arab Republic, all the speakers appeared to have a clear view of the obligations involved. It was evident that the instruments adopted by the ILO had to be submitted to the competent authorities, which normally consisted of the national parliament. The task was clear and easy and was without consequences as to the nature of action to be taken on the instruments in question. The procedure was self-evident in a democracy, where such instruments needed to be submitted to the sovereign body. Compliance with the obligation of submission therefore increased the democratic credentials of member States. The Employer members therefore hoped that the situation would improve and that the instruments adopted by the Conference would be submitted to national parliaments by more member States within the respective time limits.

The Worker members endorsed the remarks and the hopes expressed by the Employer members on the question.

The Committee noted the information supplied and explanations given by the Government representatives and by other speakers who took the floor. It also noted the specific difficulties encountered in complying with this obligation to submit mentioned by various speakers. Lastly, it took due note of the commitments made by several Government representatives to comply with their constitutional obligation to submit Conventions and Recommendations to the competent authorities in the shortest possible time. The Committee expressed the firm hope that the countries mentioned, namely Afghanistan, Belize, Cambodia, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Congo, Haiti, Honduras, Papua New Guinea, Saint Lucia, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic and Yemen would, in the near future, send in reports containing information relating to the submission of Conventions and Recommendations to the competent authorities. Delays and failures to submit and the increase in the number of such cases were of great concern to the Committee because these were obligations emanating from the Constitution and were essential to the effectiveness of the standard-setting activities. In this connection, the Committee reiterated that the ILO could provide technical assistance to help comply with this obligation. The Committee decided to mention all these cases in the appropriate section of its General Report.

(b) Information received

Brazil. The Government has supplied information on the submission to the National Congress of the instruments adopted at the 80th Session (June 1993) of the International Labour Conference.

Comoros. The Government has supplied information on the submission to the competent authorities of the instruments adopted until the 78th Session (1991) of the International Labour Conference.

Guatemala. The Government has supplied information on the submission to the competent authorities of the instruments adopted during the 83rd Session (1996) of the International Labour Conference.

Guinea-Bissau. The Government has supplied information on the submission to the competent authorities of the instruments adopted until the 78th Session (1991) of the International Labour Conference.

India. Since the meeting of the Committee of Experts, the Government has supplied information on the submission to the competent authorities of the instruments adopted during the 83rd Session (1996) of the International Labour Conference.

Kyrgyzstan. As Kyrgyzstan has been a Member of the ILO since 1992, the criterion on the submission to the competent authorities of the instruments adopted by the International Labour Conference is not applicable this year.

Liberia. Since the meeting of the Committee of Experts, the Government has also supplied information on the submission to the competent authorities of Conventions and Recommendations adopted between the 76th (1989) and 86th (1998) Sessions of the International Labour Conference.

Madagascar. Convention No. 173, adopted at the 79th Session (1992) of the International Labour Conference, has been ratified.

Senegal. Since the meeting of the Committee of Experts, the Government has sent replies to most of the Committee's comments. It has also supplied information on the submission to the competent authorities of the instruments adopted until the 78th Session (1991) of the International Labour Conference.

United Republic of Tanzania. The Protocol of 1995 relating to the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947, adopted at the 82nd Session (1995) of the International Labour Conference, has been ratified.

IV. REPORTS ON UNRATIFIED CONVENTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
(Article 19 of the Constitution)

(a) Failure to supply reports on unratified Conventions and on Recommendations for the past five years

The Employer members emphasized that it was one of the constitutional obligations under article 19 that member States had to submit reports on unratified Conventions and on Recommendations. These reports involved no risk that the countries concerned might be criticized for their non-compliance with the instruments concerned. Moreover, they did not imply any obligation to comply with the relevant provisions. The reports in question provided the basis for both the extensive general surveys undertaken by the Committee of Experts, as well as the shorter surveys on core Conventions which had been carried out in recent years. The information supplied in these reports provided a realistic picture of the situation in member States which had not ratified the respective Conventions. The resulting surveys were valuable to the ILO, countries and individuals in illustrating the situation in other countries and suggesting measures which might be taken. This information was also of importance to the ILO in establishing its programme of work. The failure to provide these reports for five years or more was a serious shortcoming and the Employer members reaffirmed the importance of complying with this obligation.

The Worker members endorsed the comments made by the Employer members. They stressed the importance of sending reports on ratified and non-ratified Conventions and on Recommendations to be used as a basis for preparing general surveys and understanding the obstacles confronted by member States when ratifying the Conventions. The reports also made it possible to assess whether or not the Conventions were still adapted to the economic and social context. In view of the fundamental role played by the reports, it should be stressed that they must be transmitted on time.

A Government representative of Fiji referred, in relation to the failure of his country to submit the reports due on unratified Conventions and on Recommendations, to the information he had provided previously. Any outstanding reports which had been completed would be sent to the ILO upon his return to his country.

A Government representative of Haiti stated that when considering the table of ratifications of Conventions by member States of the ILO, one could ascertain that his country had only ratified 23 Conventions. This figure showed that it was necessary to ensure the promotion of international labour standards and their ratification. He explained that the weak rate of ratification of Conventions by his country was a result of lack of cooperation between the legislature and the executive.

A Government representative of Lesotho regretted the failure of her Government to comply with its obligations under article 19 of the ILO Constitution. This had been due to a lack of technical capacity and human resources in the Ministry of Employment and Labour. Efforts had been made jointly with the ILO to address the problem and improve compliance with the country's reporting obligations. The progress achieved was demonstrated by the fact that Lesotho was now up to date with its reporting obligations concerning all ratified Conventions and with its submission requirements. She added that her Government always consulted employers and workers through their respective representative organizations on matters relating to the obligations of the country, particularly relating to international labour standards. Furthermore, in the process of restructuring the civil service, emphasis had been placed on the Ministry of Employment and Labour to ensure that it was able to comply with its obligations towards the ILO. A performance audit of the Ministry had been carried out by the ILO in 1997 at the request of the Government and the recommendations were being taken into account in the programme of restructuring the Ministry. She emphasized that by next year everything would be in place for the fulfilment of all these obligations. The failure to send the reports required under article 19 had also been caused by a communication problem between the Ministry of Employment and Labour and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which had been receiving all official ILO correspondence, without necessarily passing it on. Contacts between the two Ministries had resulted in the development of arrangements to overcome these difficulties. Efforts were also under way to ensure that the article 19 report due on Recommendation No. 152 for the General Survey to be undertaken next year would be supplied in good time. She reaffirmed her Government's commitment to the ideals and obligations of the ILO and hoped that the technical assistance which had been received would continue so that Lesotho could diligently observe its obligations as a Member of the ILO.

A Government representative of the Republic of Moldova emphasized the importance of submitting the reports due under article 19 promptly. His country was in the process of completing the two reports due in this respect, which would be sent to the office once agreement had been reached on its contents with the social partners.

The Worker members emphasized that the statements of the various speakers did not add anything new regarding the failure to communicate reports on Conventions that have not been ratified and on Recommendations. The Committee must insist that governments fully respect this obligation which is from the ILO Constitution in order to enable the Committee of Experts to prepare complete general surveys.

The Employer members expressed their full agreement with the comments made by the Worker members and endorsed the call that they had made for an improvement in compliance by member States with their obligations under article 19.

The Committee noted the information and explanations supplied by the Government representatives and other speakers. The Committee emphasized the importance it attached to the constitutional obligation to send reports on unratified Conventions and Recommendations. In fact, these reports made possible a better evaluation of the situation within the context of the general surveys of the Committee of Experts. The Committee insisted that all member States should fulfil their obligations in this respect and expressed the firm hope that the Governments of Afghanistan, Armenia, Djibouti, Fiji, Georgia, Haiti, Kazakhstan, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Republic of Moldova, Nigeria, Saint Lucia, Solomon Islands, Somalia, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Turkmenistan would fulfil their obligations under article 19 of the Constitution in the future. The Committee decided to mention these cases in the appropriate section of its General Report.

(b) Reports on Unratified Conventions Nos. 97 and 143 and on Recommendations Nos. 86 and 151 as at 1 June 1999

In addition to the reports listed in Appendix D on page 295 of the Report of the Committee of Experts (Report III, Part 1B), reports have been received from the following countries:

Costa Rica, El Salvador, Myanmar, Niger and Seychelles.

INDEX BY COUNTRIES TO OBSERVATIONS AND INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE REPORT

Afghanistan

Part One, General Report, paras. 181, 183, 186, 201, 205
Part Two, I A (a), (c)
Part Two, III (a)
Part Two, IV (a)

Antigua and Barbuda

Part One, General Report, paras. 183, 186, 205
Part Two, I A (a), (c)

Armenia

Part One, General Report, paras. 183, 184, 201, 204
Part Two, I A (a), (b)
Part Two, IV (a)

Australia

Part One, General Report, paras. 186, 204
Part Two, I A (c)
Part Two, I B, No. 29

Bangladesh

Part Two, I B, No. 87

Belize

Part One, General Report, paras. 181, 205
Part Two, I A (d)
Part Two, III (a)

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Part One, General Report, paras. 183, 186
Part Two, I A (a), (c)

Brazil

Part Two, I B, No. 107
Part Two, III (b)

Burkina Faso

Part One, General Report, para. 186
Part Two, I A (c)

Burundi

Part One, General Report, paras. 183, 184, 186
Part Two, I A (a), (b), (c)

Cambodia

Part One, General Report, para. 181
Part Two, III (a)

Cameroon

Part One, General Report, paras. 181, 194, 204
Part Two, I B, No. 87
Part Two, III (a)

Canada

Part Two, I B, No. 87

Cape Verde

Part Two, I A (d)

Central African Republic

Part One, General Report, para. 181
Part Two, III (a)

Chad

Part Two, I B, No. 26

Comoros

Part One, General Report, paras. 186, 205
Part Two, I A (c)
Part Two, III (b)

Congo

Part One, General Report, paras. 181, 204
Part Two, I A (d)
Part Two, III (a)

Costa Rica

Part Two, I B, No. 98
Part Two, IV (b)

Cyprus

Part Two, I A (d)

Democratic Republic of the Congo

Part One, General Report, paras. 183, 186
Part Two, I A (a), (c)

Denmark

Part One, General Report, paras. 183, 186
Part Two, I A (a), (c)

Djibouti

Part One, General Report, paras. 186, 201, 205
Part Two, I A (c)
Part Two, IV (a)

Dominica

Part Two, I A (d)

Ecuador

Part Two, I B, No. 98

El Salvador

Part Two, IV (b)

Equatorial Guinea

Part One, General Report, paras. 186, 205
Part Two, I A (c)

Ethiopia

Part Two, I B, No. 87

Fiji

Part One, General Report, paras. 186, 201
Part Two, I A (c)
Part Two, IV (a)

France

Part One, General Report, para. 186
Part Two, I A (c)
Part Two, II A

Georgia

Part One, General Report, paras. 183, 201, 204
Part Two, I A (a)
Part Two, IV (a)

Ghana

Part One, General Report, para. 186
Part Two, I A (c)

Grenada

Part One, General Report, paras. 183, 184, 186, 205
Part Two, I A (a), (b), (c)

Guatemala

Part Two, I B, No. 87
Part Two, III (b)

Guinea

Part One, General Report, para. 186
Part Two, I A (c)

Guinea-Bissau

Part One, General Report, para. 186
Part Two, I A (c)
Part Two, III (b)

Haiti

Part One, General Report, paras. 181, 186, 201
Part Two, I A (c)
Part Two, III (a)
Part Two, IV (a)

Honduras

Part One, General Report, para. 181
Part Two, III (a)

India

Part Two, III (b)

Islamic Republic of Iran

Part Two, I B, No. 111

Iraq

Part One, General Report, para. 186
Part Two, I A (c)

Kazakhstan

Part One, General Report, paras. 201, 204
Part Two, IV (a)

Kenya

Part Two, I A (d)

Kyrgyzstan

Part One, General Report, paras. 184, 186, 204
Part Two, I A (b), (c)
Part Two, III (b)

Latvia

Part One, General Report, paras. 184, 186
Part Two, I A (b), (c), (d)

Lesotho

Part One, General Report, para. 201
Part Two, IV (a)

Liberia

Part One, General Report, paras. 184, 201, 204
Part Two, I A (b), (d)
Part Two, III (b)
Part Two, IV (a)

Libyan Arab Jamahiriya

Part One, General Report, paras. 186, 201, 204
Part Two, I A (c)
Part Two, I B, No. 118
Part Two, IV (a)

Madagascar

Part One, General Report, para. 186
Part Two, I A (c)
Part Two, III (b)

Malaysia

Part Two, I B, No. 98

Mali

Part One, General Report, paras. 183, 184, 186
Part Two, I A (a), (b), (c)

Malta

Part One, General Report, paras. 186, 204
Part Two, I A (c)

Mauritania

Part Two, I A (d)

Mexico

Part Two, I B, No. 102

Republic of Moldova

Part One, General Report, para. 201
Part Two, I A (d)
Part Two, IV (a)

Mongolia

Part One, General Report, paras. 186, 204
Part Two, I A (c)

Myanmar

Part One, General Report, paras. 195, 196, 198
Part Two, I B, Nos. 29, 87
Part Two, IV (b)

Nepal

Part Two, I A (d)

Netherlands

Part One, General Report, para. 186
Part Two, I A (c)

Niger

Part One, General Report, para. 186
Part Two, I A (c)
Part Two, IV (b)

Nigeria

Part One, General Report, paras. 186, 201, 204
Part Two, I A (c), (d)
Part Two, IV (a)

Pakistan

Part Two, I B, No. 29

Papua New Guinea

Part One, General Report, para. 181
Part Two, III (a)

Paraguay

Part One, General Report, paras. 186, 204
Part Two, I A (c)

Peru

Part Two, I B, No. 29

Philippines

Part Two, I A (d)

Russian Federation

Part Two, I B, Nos. 95, 108

Rwanda

Part One, General Report, paras. 186, 204
Part Two, I A (c)

Saint Lucia

Part One, General Report, paras. 181, 183, 186, 201, 205
Part Two, I A (a), (c)
Part Two, III (a)
Part Two, IV (a)

Sao Tome and Principe

Part One, General Report, paras. 181, 186, 204
Part Two, I A (c)
Part Two, III (a)

Senegal

Part Two, I A (d)
Part Two, III (b)

Seychelles

Part One, General Report, para. 181
Part Two, I A (d)
Part Two, III (a)
Part Two, IV (b)

Sierra Leone

Part One, General Report, paras. 181, 183, 186, 205
Part Two, I A (a), (c)
Part Two, III (a)

Solomon Islands

Part One, General Report, paras. 181, 186, 201, 205
Part Two, I A (c)
Part Two, III (a)
Part Two, IV (a)

Somalia

Part One, General Report, paras. 181, 183, 186, 201, 205
Part Two, I A (a), (c)
Part Two, III (a)
Part Two, IV (a)

Sri Lanka

Part Two, I B, No. 81

Swaziland

Part One, General Report, para. 181
Part Two, I B, No. 87
Part Two, III (a)

Syrian Arab Republic

Part One, General Report, para. 181
Part Two, III (a)

Tajikistan

Part Two, I A (d)

United Republic of Tanzania

Part One, General Report, para. 183
Part Two, I A (a)
Part Two, III (b)

The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

Part One, General Report, paras. 201, 204
Part Two, IV (a)

Togo

Part One, General Report, paras. 186, 204
Part Two, I A (c)

Turkmenistan

Part One, General Report, paras. 201, 205
Part Two, IV (a)

Uganda

Part Two, I A (d)

Uzbekistan

Part One, General Report, paras. 183, 184, 205
Part Two, I A (a), (b)

Venezuela

Part Two, I B, No. 87

Yemen

Part One, General Report, paras. 181, 204
Part Two, III (a)

Updated by HK. Approved by RH. Last update: 26 January 2000.