(AGENPARL) – ven 16 giugno 2023 ? ILC.111/ Record No. 4A/P.I
? Record of Proceedings
International Labour Conference – 111th Session, Geneva, 2023
Date: 16 June 2023
Part One
Third item on the agenda:
Information and reports on the application of
Conventions and Recommendations
Report of the Committee on the Application of Standards
Part One
General Report
Contents
A. Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
B. General questions relating to international labour standards ……………………………………………
C. Reports requested under article 19 of the Constitution ……………………………………………………..
D. Compliance with specific obligations ………………………………………………………………………………….
E. Conclusions adopted following the examination of the individual cases ……………………………
F. Adoption of the report and closing remarks ………………………………………………………………………
Annex I …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Annex II ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
Introduction
In accordance with article 7 of the Standing Orders, the Conference set up a Committee to
consider and report on item III on the agenda: “Information and reports on the application of
Conventions and Recommendations”. The Committee was composed of 247 members
(128 Government members, 8 Employer members and 111 Worker members). It also included
8 Government deputy members, 80 Employer deputy members and 93 Worker deputy
members. In addition, 65 international non-governmental organizations were represented by
observers.
The Committee elected its Officers as follows:
Chairperson:
H.E. Ambassador Khalil Hashmi
(Government member, Pakistan)
Vice-Chairpersons:
Mr Paul Mackay (Employer member, New Zealand) and
Mr Marc Leemans (Worker member, Belgium)
Reporter:
Ms Joanna ?eber (Government member, Poland)
The Committee held 23 sittings.
In accordance with its terms of reference, the Committee considered: (i) the reports supplied
under articles 22 and 35 of the ILO Constitution on the application of ratified Conventions;
(ii) the reports requested by the Governing Body under article 19 of the Constitution on the
Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111), the Workers with
Family Responsibilities Convention, 1981 (No. 156), the Maternity Protection Convention, 2000
(No. 183), the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Recommendation, 1958 (No. 111),
the Workers with Family Responsibilities Recommendation, 1981 (No. 165), and the Maternity
Protection Recommendation, 2000 (No. 191); (iii) the information supplied under article 19 of
the Constitution on the submission to the competent authorities of Conventions and
Recommendations adopted by the Conference; and (iv) written information supplied by the
governments. 1
Opening sitting
Chairperson: Let me start by thanking you for the confidence you have placed in me by
electing me to preside over the work of this important Committee. It is a great honour for me
and for my country to represent the Asia-Pacific region, and to be given the responsibility of
chairing the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards this year, the year of
return to normality.
I would like to congratulate the two Vice-Chairpersons, as well as the Reporter, on their election
as Officers to this Committee. I look forward to working closely with you over the course of the
next two weeks. I count on your experience, cooperation and wise counsel in steering the work
of this Committee.
The founder of our nation, the Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, once said, and I quote:
“We must work our destiny in our own way and present to the world an economic system based
Report III to the International Labour Conference – Part A: Report of the Committee of Experts on the Application of
Conventions and Recommendations; Part B: General Survey.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
on the true Islamic concept of equality of mankind and social justice”. Working its own way
towards social justice is what this august Committee has relentlessly done since 1927, and I
hope my chairmanship may strengthen the faith in its mission. Our national Urdu poet
Dr Allama Muhammad Iqbal also described the centrality of faith in our mission: “In slavery,
neither swords nor strategies are of any use, but with the taste of faith, chains are broken”.
This Committee has always been the pillar of the regular ILO supervisory system and at the
heart of the ILO’s tripartite system. It is the forum for tripartite dialogue in which the
Organization has been debating the application of international labour standards and the
functioning of the standards system since 1926. The conclusions adopted by the Conference
Committee and the technical work of the Committee of Experts on the Application of
Conventions and Recommendations, together with the technical assistance of the Office, are
essential tools for Member States when implementing international labour standards.
I am pleased to note that the Report of the Committee of Experts provides a solid basis for our
debates once again this year. I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the online
presence of the Reporter of the Committee of Experts, Professor Ago, who will address your
Committee remotely in a short while. I must inform you that for reasons beyond her control,
the Chairperson of the Committee of Experts, Ms Graciela Dixon Caton, has been unable to
travel to Geneva to address your Committee this year. I also acknowledge the presence of the
Chairperson of the Committee on Freedom of Association, Professor Evance Kalula.
I strongly encourage you to participate actively in the debates and I trust that in the course of
the two-week session of the Conference, the Committee will be able to meet the high
expectations of the ILO constituents in the spirit of constructive dialogue.
I would also like to particularly welcome those Government representatives who have been
asked to coordinate the work of the regional groups in this Committee. Your contribution and
cooperation will be central to ensuring the full involvement of all governments. I would like to
bring to your attention the fact that, unless otherwise specified, all statements made by
Government members on behalf of regional groups or intergovernmental organizations are
reported as having been made on behalf of all governments, members of the group or
organization in question, who are Members of the ILO and are attending the Conference.
Employer members: This is the first full in-person meeting of the Committee since the
outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic and the hybrid meeting last year. We think it is important
to draw lessons from the adjustments and modalities adopted during the pandemic. In
particular, we need to embrace the improvements and good practices on time management
to ensure that our work continues to remain effective and relevant. We trust that the
Chairperson with his able leadership will ensure efficient use of time and avoid evening sittings
as much as possible, in order to allow sufficient time to prepare for the discussion of cases and
the all-important negotiation of conclusions.
The discussion this year takes place against the backdrop of the continuing impact of the
pandemic, as well as a challenging geopolitical situation with economic and humanitarian
consequences which continue to shake the world and destabilize many countries. All of this
has severely affected the application of ILO standards and we need to take this into account in
our supervisory work.
Let me recall that the Standing Orders of the Conference indicate that the Committee has an
unrestricted mandate to supervise the application of standards. In delivering its tasks, the
Conference Committee receives technical preparatory support from the Office and uses the
Committee of Experts reports and written information provided by governments as a starting
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
point. The Conference Committee then adopts conclusions on all items discussed, and does so
autonomously without being bound by the views or non-binding analyses of other parties.
Furthermore, let me recall the importance for social partners to maintain full authority and
control over the list of individual cases. According to our Committee’s practice, the list should
be drawn up by the Worker and Employer members with consideration for a balance of regions
and the types of Conventions. It is important that this process be respected and free from any
external interference or influence.
The ILO Centenary Declaration for the Future of Work (2019) calls upon all tripartite
constituents to “promote a clear, robust, up-to-date body of international labour standards
and to further enhance transparency. International labour standards also need to respond to
the changing patterns of the world of work, protect workers and take into account the needs
of sustainable enterprises, and be subject to authoritative and effective supervision”. To fulfil
this mandate, we need to carefully listen to constituents in order to fully understand the
national context, including the protection needs of workers and the needs of sustainable
enterprises. Only on this basis will we be able to support them effectively with relevant
guidance to find appropriate solutions through their national social dialogue for better
compliance with standards-related obligations.
This Conference Committee, the Committee of Experts and the Office, which provides the
support for the work of both committees, should demonstrate their capacity for realism,
balance and pragmatism in the ILO standards supervision as we assume our share of
responsibility for the promotion of resilient economies and labour markets in ILO Member
States.
The Employer members are committed to participating in the discussions in a constructive
spirit and look forward to a results-oriented, balanced tripartite dialogue at this session. While
divergence of views on substantial issues exists among constituents and between the
Conference Committee and the Committee of Experts, we trust that they will continue to be
voiced in a spirit of mutual respect, understanding and cooperation. We also request that the
views expressed in our Committee and its conclusions be duly considered by other ILO
supervisory bodies, by the Office in its support of the overall system and its technical
assistance, and by ILO initiatives and in discussions in the context of the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development. We look forward to meaningful discussions and completing the
work of this Committee over the next two weeks.
Worker members: The Conference this year is characterized by a return to normality, which
means, among other things, the return to 24 cases, which we are used to discussing. During
the Conference Committee’s sittings, we will have the opportunity to discuss cases that all
show, to varying degrees, shortcomings in the observance of standards. But the supervision
of standards cannot be carried out in isolation. It is always influenced by political, economic
and even geopolitical issues. These issues clearly have a determining impact on women and
men workers, and particularly on their rights. I would like to review some of them, without
being exhaustive.
The aggression against Ukraine by the Russian Federation and the war that is ravaging the
country have had serious repercussions for workers throughout the world. Combined with the
effects of the pandemic, they have given rise to inflation that is continuing to undermine the
living standards of workers. Despite the relative calm that we have observed for several
months, it is clear that these trends are likely to persist, and even to accelerate. It is essential
for governments to adopt appropriate measures to maintain the living standards of workers,
particularly the most precarious, in accordance with ILO standards.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
Recent history teaches us that governments often tend to sacrifice the rights and interests of
workers when they are confronted with difficulties. The economic challenges resulting from
the situation that we are experiencing must not under any event serve as a pretext to weaken
workers’ rights, especially those that enable them to make their voices heard, namely freedom
of association and the right to collective bargaining, fundamental rights of which we are
celebrating the 75th anniversary. In times of crisis, these empowering rights are even more
important, in the same way as other fundamental standards.
But, over and above the impact of inflation, no one can ignore the fact that our societies are at
a pivotal moment and facing a series of reconfigurations. In this context, I would like to warn
against two perils that are a threat to international standards. The first is based on the
observation that several countries, which have hitherto been held as examples for the
observance of rights, have seen a deterioration in their situation. An increasing number of laws
are being seen that restrict individual freedoms, the right to demonstrate, as well as the right
to strike. These are excesses that are bound to give rise to our concern and condemnation. We
warn these governments and remind them that it will be increasingly difficult to call on other
governments to respect rights that they themselves are undermining in their own territories.
Being exemplary is often the price of being credible.
The other danger is found at another level. It is an argument darkened by a relativism that
seeks to fight against the universality of standards. It consists of making use of so-called
specificities to explain and excuse non-respect for these standards. These arguments claim
that developing countries must first concern themselves with their economic development
before recognizing and respecting the labour rights of workers. This reminds us of colonialist
narratives which refused to accept the applicability of standards on the pretext that
colonialized peoples were not ready for their implementation, or again those that claim that
there is no social paradise in an economic desert. This type of reasoning seems to ignore the
fact that the full recognition of workers’ rights is an indispensable precondition for economic
prosperity. Moreover, when they are drawn up, ILO standards already take into account
differences in levels of development and adopt a flexible and progressive approach. In
particular, it should be noted that these standards have as their purpose the emancipation of
workers from hunger, poverty and arbitrary treatment. They are intended to offer a means of
regulating industrial relations which, irrespective of the specific characteristics of each country,
provides workers with protection and a way of ensuring that their voices are heard.
I indicated at the beginning of my intervention that we would have the occasion to discuss
many cases of the non-observance of standards. I hope that our discussions will be held in a
spirit of mutual respect. And evidently, these discussions must be free from any attempt at
intimidation. Finally, I recall that our Committee is not a court of law. Its mission does not
consist of deciding between points of view or finding a guilty party. Based on the situation of
the country that is failing to give effect to its obligations, it instead endeavours to lay down a
path and develop a way forward that will enable it to fulfil its commitments. I hope that we can
all bear this in mind so that our work is constructive and fruitful.
Work of the Committee
During its opening sitting, the Committee held a moment of silence in memory of Mr Alberto
Echavarría, former Employer member of the Committee on the Application of Standards and
Employer spokesperson on the ILO Governing Body’s Committee on Freedom of Association.
The Employer and Worker members, the Government member of Colombia, the representative
of the Secretary-General, and the Chairperson of the Committee on Freedom of Association
paid tribute to Mr Echavarría’s contribution to the work of the Committee and his legacy in
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
strengthening the ILO supervisory system, while conveying their sincere condolences to his
family, friends and colleagues.
The Committee also adopted at its opening sitting document D.1, which sets out the manner
in which the work of the Committee is carried out 2 and, on that basis, the Committee
considered its working methods, as reflected below.
In accordance with its usual practice, the Committee continued its work with a discussion on
general aspects of the application of Conventions and Recommendations and the discharge
by Member States of standards-related obligations under the ILO Constitution. In this general
discussion, reference was made to Part One of the report of the Committee of Experts on the
Application of Conventions and Recommendations. A summary of the general discussion is
found under relevant headings in sections A and B of Part One of this report.
The final part of the general discussion focused on the General Survey entitled Achieving gender
equality at work. This discussion is contained in section I of Part Two of this report. The outcome
of this discussion is contained in section C of Part One of this report.
Following these discussions, the Committee considered the cases of serious failure by Member
States to respect their reporting and other standards-related obligations. The result of the
examination of these cases is contained in section D of Part One of this report. More detailed
information on that discussion is contained in section II of Part Two of this report.
The Committee then considered 24 individual cases relating to the application of various
Conventions. The examination of the individual cases was based principally on the
observations contained in the Committee of Experts’ report and the oral and written
explanations provided by the governments concerned. As usual, the Committee also referred
to its discussions in previous years, comments received from employers’ and workers’
organizations and, where appropriate, reports of other supervisory bodies of the ILO and other
international organizations. With reference to its examination of these cases, the Committee
reiterated the importance it placed on the role of tripartite dialogue in its work and trusted
that the governments of the countries selected would make every effort to take the necessary
measures to fulfil their obligations under ratified Conventions. The information submitted by
governments and the discussions on the examination of individual cases, are contained in
section III of Part Two of this report. The conclusions adopted by the Committee are contained
in section E of Part One of this report.
The adoption of the report and the closing remarks are contained in section F of Part One of
this report.
Working methods of the Committee
Chairperson: One of the important challenges that our Committee will have to face once again
this year will be to complete its crucial work in a tight time frame and this brings me to the
question of how best to manage our time. To ensure success we have to abide by our working
schedule and implement strictly the measures contained in document D.1, in particular
concerning time management. Let me emphasize certain key steps in this respect. First,
maximum speaking time will apply during the general discussion, the discussion of the General
Survey and during the examination of individual cases. I intend to enforce these limits very
strictly and I count on your support and understanding. Details about time limits are contained
Work of the Committee on the Application of Standards, International Labour Conference, 111th Session, CAN/D.1
(see Appendix 1).
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
in Part IX of document D.1 which is also available on the Committee’s web page. During the
interventions, screens will indicate the remaining time for speakers. Once the maximum
speaking time has been reached, the time indication will turn red on the screen and I will have
the unpleasant duty of interrupting the speaker. The speaking times will be adjusted according
to the number of speakers who may have registered. Where necessary, I will have recourse to
the possibility of deciding, in consultation with the Officers of the Committee, to reduce
speaking time limits, for instance where there is a very long list of speakers. Where such a
decision is warranted, the Committee will be informed and the secretariat will try, as far as
possible, to inform the delegates on the list of speakers, thus allowing them to adapt the text
(more precisely shorten the text) of their statements to the time they will finally be allocated.
Speakers who have not registered in advance may only be given the floor if time allows.
Let me now turn to registration on the list of speakers. To allow efficient time management,
delegates are requested to register on the list of speakers as early as possible. As indicated in
document D.1, the practice of drawing up a list of speakers 24 hours before the examination
of each item on the Committee’s agenda remains in force. Delegates who are accredited to the
Conference and registered in the Committee should request their inclusion on the list of
speakers by filling in the relevant form which is available on the Committee’s web page and by
Committee, observers can be placed on the list of speakers after approval by the Officers of
the Committee. The list of speakers will be visible on screens in both the rooms for each sitting
of the Committee. The number of speakers registered to take the floor will be clearly indicated.
Moreover, group interventions are encouraged over individual statements or interventions.
Let me now turn to the minutes of the sitting. The discussions of the Committee will be
produced in the form of verbatim transcripts. Each intervention will be reported in extenso in
the working language in which it has been delivered or, failing that, the language chosen by
the government, which is English, French or Spanish. The verbatim draft minutes will be made
available online on the Committee’s dedicated web page.
It has been the Committee’s practice to accept amendments to the verbatim draft minutes of
previous sittings prior to their adoption by the Committee. The time available to delegates to
submit amendments to the verbatim draft minutes will be clearly indicated by me when they
are made available to the Committee. Delegates are kindly requested to send their
amendments to the secretariat by email with track changes. Where needed, in order to make
track changes, delegates are invited to request the Word version of the draft verbatim minutes
by sending an email. Also, to avoid delays in the preparation of the Committee’s Report, no
amendments may be accepted once the draft minutes have been approved.
Finally, in accordance with Part X of document D.1, all delegates have an obligation to the
Conference to abide by Parliamentary language and by the generally accepted procedure.
Interventions should be relevant to the subject under discussion and should avoid references
to extraneous matters. It is my responsibility as Chairperson of this Committee to ensure that
the rules of decorum are respected. During the Committee’s sittings, filming is not allowed and
delegates may not take photos of delegations other than their own. Nor is it allowed to send
live tweets during Committee sittings.
In conclusion, let me underline that while the challenges ahead of us are great, I trust that we
can count on our collective wisdom and experience, as well as on that of our dedicated
secretariat to ensure the success of this Committee.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
Adoption of the list of individual cases
The Committee adopted, during the course of the opening sitting, the list of individual cases
to be discussed. 3
Worker members: We welcome the adoption of the list. Without being an exact science, its
formulation tries to take into account certain criteria such as regional balance, the nature of
the Conventions or the degree of seriousness of the situation. My Employer counterpart and I
will be at the disposal of the governments for the explanatory meeting that is scheduled
immediately after our session.
The need to take several criteria into account means that many cases that appear on the
preliminary list deserve to be on the final list but are not. There are a few to which I would like
to draw particular attention. The case of China continues to hold our full attention. The written
information supplied by the government after the publication of the preliminary list contains
some interesting details. We note that the government is committed to implementing our
Committee’s conclusions, which date back to last year. We hope that this will be done as soon
as possible and that they will be fully implemented.
I would also like to express the concern of the Worker members about the situation in Tunisia.
Freedoms in the country continue to be restricted. Trade union freedoms, in particular, are
being seriously curtailed. The practices that we are observing are detrimental to the interests
of Tunisian workers and violate their rights. The Tunisian Government cannot ignore the fact
that the trade union movement in the country has always been a driver and guarantee of
stability. We therefore call on it to respect individual freedoms, and in particular freedom of
association. Lastly, we would like to raise the case of France, where protection against unfair
dismissal has been severely limited, as part of a more general undermining of workers’ rights
in the country, which heightens our concerns. I reiterate my hope that all parties will approach
the discussion of the 24 cases in a constructive and respectful manner.
Employer members: Like the Worker members, we too are satisfied that the list of cases has
been adopted. As everybody knows, this is a negotiated list and therefore represents
compromises that had to be made regarding the cases that will be heard and the ones that will
not. Ideally, we would have liked to hear the Committee examine more cases of progress.
Nepal is the only example on this year’s list that would come under that heading. We would
like to see more cases where compliance with Conventions would enhance the creation of a
sustaining and sustainable environment for business growth and job creation. In respect of
fundamental Conventions, we note that there are no Conventions on occupational safety and
health (OSH) on the list this year, which is a pity given that last year we celebrated the elevation
of OSH to the status of fundamental principles and rights at work.
Conversely, we feel that certain cases should not have been included in the list. I won’t go into
the details because these will become apparent when these cases are discussed. Our concerns
relate to the fact that each has characteristics that deviate from the core mandate of this
Conference Committee, which is to examine compliance with the specified Convention. Broadly
speaking, these cases fall into three main groups: (i) where discussions to address certain
issues of application are already well advanced at the national level; or (ii) where discussions
have previously taken place in the Conference Committee and the details haven’t changed; or
(iii) where cases concern issues that exceed the ambit of ILO Conventions, for instance the
prevailing political environment in the country. In our view, this Committee should be focused
International Labour Conference, 111th Session, Committee on the Application of Standards, CAN/D.2.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
on examining a case strictly in the context of the Convention that is the subject of the
Committee of Experts’ report. Allowing ourselves to drift from this focus invites criticism of the
relevance and effectiveness of our work that none of us wants.
Secondly, and at the outset of our work, I would like to remind the Committee that as in
previous years, any issues referring to a right to strike in the Freedom of Association and
Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), which, as we all know, has been
contentious, will not be included in the conclusions of cases. This will apply in this year’s context
to the cases of Guatemala, Liberia, Madagascar, Netherlands–Sint Maarten, Nicaragua, Peru,
the Philippines and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. As many of you
will recall, in previous Committee sessions we have expressed our concerns with the
Committee of Experts’ extensive, yet non-binding, assessment of Convention No. 87 on this
point. We have pointed out on many occasions the legislative history of Convention No. 87,
documented in the proceedings of the International Labour Conference. It is clear from these
records that the proposed Convention related only to freedom of association and not to the
right to strike.
Having commented briefly on the areas of concern, let me turn to what we would like to see in
the future, albeit in general terms. Overall, we want to see a balanced list of cases as we also
heard from the Worker members. This balance would take into account regional spread,
different types of Conventions (fundamental, priority, governance and technical), as well as
balance between those of primary interest to Worker and Employer members respectively.
Such a list can provide enhanced benefits because the guidance derived across a broader
range of Conventions is likely to be of benefit to a broader range of countries in a given
reporting cycle. This should also include a number of cases of progress. We need to show the
global community that the Committee not only deals with issues of non-compliance but can
also contribute to improvements in the application of ILO Conventions. With these remarks I
commit to working constructively with our social partners in addressing the cases we have
before us now. As I said at the outset, the Employer members accept the list of cases.
General questions relating to international labour standards
Statement by the representative of the Secretary-General 4
Representative of the Secretary-General: As the representative of the Secretary-General for
your Committee, I have the privilege of leading the team that stands ready to provide you with
all necessary assistance to ensure that the Committee functions smoothly and effectively.
At the outset, I would like to thank Professor Ago, the Reporter of the Committee of Experts on
the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, and Professor Evance Kalula,
Chairperson of the Committee on Freedom of Association, who will address your Committee
to present the reports of their respective committees.
My brief intervention will cover two main points: (i) the constitutional mandate and work of
your Committee; and (ii) a brief up-date of key developments in respect of the ILO’s normative
work.
Your Committee is a standing committee of the International Labour Conference. Since 1926
when it was established, the Committee has met at each session of the International Labour
International Labour Conference, 111th Session, Committee on the Application of Standards, CAN/D.3.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
Conference. Its mandate lies at the heart of the ILO’s action and consists of examining and
bringing to the attention of the plenary of the Conference:
the measures taken by Members to comply with their obligations to communicate
information and reports under articles 19, 22, 23 and 35 of the Constitution and to give
effect to the provisions of Conventions to which they are parties; and
the information and reports concerning Conventions and Recommendations
communicated by Members in accordance with article 19 of the Constitution. Under the
terms of this article, your Committee examines at every session of the Conference, a
General Survey on the law and practice of Member States in a specific area.
This year, your Committee has before it the report produced by the Committee of Experts at
its 93rd Session (November–December 2022) along with the 2023 General Survey entitled
Achieving gender equality at work. This is the first General Survey that examines together the
topics of gender discrimination, maternity protection and workers with family responsibilities.
Now, a few words about the work of your Conference Committee. Document D.1 details all the
measures that will allow your Committee to discharge its constitutional obligations. These
reflect the outcome of the informal tripartite consultations on the Committee’s working
methods which took place on 5 April 2023. These informal tripartite consultations, that were
held this year for the 17th time, have resulted in numerous improvements of your Committee’s
working methods and are a testimony of the agility of the ILO supervisory system, including of
your Committee to constantly adjust and innovate to deliver effectively on its important
function. Detailed information about the many improvements introduced over time in the
working methods of your Committee is available on the Committee’s web page.
No doubt all Government delegates will appreciate the consensus reached during the informal
tripartite consultations of April 2023 to schedule the adoption of the final list of “individual”
cases to be discussed by the Committee, at today’s opening session. This should certainly
facilitate your preparation of the examination of the 24 individual cases. The provisional
working schedule (document D.0) will be rapidly adjusted to reflect the order in which the
24 cases will be discussed. The Conference Committee’s report will be presented for adoption
to the plenary sitting of the International Labour Conference on Friday, 16 June.
I would now like to refer to some standards-related anniversaries that we will be
commemorating this year and provide a quick overview of the main standards-related
activities carried out since your previous session. This year we commemorate the anniversaries
of several important instruments:
• Convention No. 87, adopted 75 years ago, a few months before the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights, established the right to organize of both employers and workers and thus
enabled the ILO supervisory bodies to relentlessly defend them and their organizations over
the years and to this day. This anniversary is an opportunity for us to take the time to remind
ourselves and all the constituents of this Organization that Convention No. 87 along with the
Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), constitute the DNA
of this Organization, as the right to organize is a precondition for the effective exercise of all
other rights at work beginning with the concurrent right to collective bargaining.
• Convention No. 111, adopted 65 years ago, played a pioneering role, as complemented by
the Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100), in adding sex among the prohibited
grounds of discrimination and making it clear that equality of opportunity and treatment
between women and men does not mean identical or equal treatment but rather
substantive equality of opportunity and human dignity. It also innovated in enabling the ILO
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
supervisory bodies to address the question of affirmative or positive action to deal with the
consequences of past discrimination.
• The Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138), and its accompanying Recommendation
(No. 146), adopted 50 years ago, was among the first to proclaim children’s rights, serving
as a precursor to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, adopted 16 years later, and
Convention No. 182 on the worst forms of child labour, 1999, which has since been
universally ratified.
• The 1998 Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work also turns 25 this year.
Together with its annual follow-up, the Declaration is the blueprint of the ILO’s strategy to
promote a fair globalization. In the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Declaration
confirmed that it continues to play a pivotal role for the promotion of decent work by virtue
of its 2022 amendment which added a safe and healthy work environment to its scope.
Last but not least, we celebrate the 75th anniversary of the emblematic Universal Declaration
of Human Rights. The vision of “all human beings born free and equal in dignity and rights”,
proclaimed in the Universal Declaration, is once again today at the heart of the increasing
claims for dignity, equality, respect, freedom and rights, particularly of the most vulnerable,
whose daily reality is reflected in the statistics that report rising inequalities across the globe.
In this context, it is hardly surprising that the report of the Secretary-General to the Conference
on the need for greater social justice globally and the means to achieve it, gives high
prominence to human rights and international labour standards as a fundamental dimension
of social justice. To mark the anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the
Committee of Experts undertakes in a joint statement with the Chairpersons of eight treaty
bodies supervising the human rights Conventions, to join efforts in order to promote all human
rights, including international labour standards, through joint analyses, concerted action, and
thematic periodic meetings.
Since the Committee’s last meeting in June 2022, 42 ratifications of ILO Conventions have been
registered, confirming the continuing commitment of Member States to a rules-based
multilateral system in pursuit of social justice.
• The Violence and Harassment Convention, 2019 (No. 190), received 12 ratifications over the
past 12 months and has a total of 27 ratifications so far.
• The Social Security (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1952 (No. 102), received 4 ratifications
and has a total of 65.
• Eight ratifications concerned occupational safety and health instruments. Two of them
concerned the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155), and three the
Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 2006 (No. 187). The
recently granted fundamental status of these two Conventions is expected to enhance their
ratification rate in the near future.
Allow me to briefly recall that only a few ratifications are missing for the fundamental
Conventions on forced labour, equality and non-discrimination and child labour to reach
universal ratification. One ratification was registered for each of Conventions Nos 100 and 138
as well as the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), while the Abolition of Forced Labour
Convention, 1957 (No. 105), received two ratifications.
However, no ratification has been registered in the past 12 months for the fundamental
Conventions on freedom of association and collective bargaining and the Protocol of 2014 to
Convention No. 29. I am therefore pleased that on the occasion of this Conference, the
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
Director-General should receive the instruments of ratification for Convention No. 87 from
Guinea Bissau and for the Protocol to Convention No. 29 from Mexico. This important Protocol
has been ratified by 59 Member States so far, corresponding to one third of the ILO’s
constituents.
With regard to the governance Conventions, the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81),
and the Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129), received one ratification
each.
As you know, the modernization of the ILO’s normative activities is one of our
Director-General’s priorities and work is continuing in that regard. First of all, the work of the
Tripartite Working Group established under the Standards Review Mechanism (SRM) continues
and is being accelerated. The SRM Tripartite Working Group met for the seventh time in
September 2022 and completed its review of instruments concerning employment injury,
making consensual recommendations which were adopted by the Governing Body. The followup to the SRM is an institutional priority that calls for a redoubling of efforts in order to make
sure that the relevant Governing Body decisions trickle down to the country level where
normative records need to be modernized. A series of activities will take place in the coming
months in order to raise awareness and promote follow-up.
Second, ways are actively explored to facilitate reporting under articles 22 and 19 of the
ILO Constitution by governments among other ways to promote an authoritative and
transparent system of supervision. In consultation with stakeholders, the Office is preparing
proposals on this subject for examination by the Governing Body at its 349th Session (October–
November 2023).
Third, increased emphasis is placed on systematically connecting the supervisory body
comments to technical assistance in order to ensure that normative guidance gives rise to
tangible results at country level. As can be seen on your Committee’s web page, the Office has
followed up on almost all cases discussed at the Committee’s previous session in order to
promote the implementation of the conclusions and recommendations adopted in June 2022.
Finally, the Office continues to deliver capacity-building to constituents through online courses
and in person, in collaboration with the International Training Centre of the ILO in Turin. I am
pleased to report that the next International Labour Standards Academy will be delivered
online from 11 September to 6 October this year to the tripartite constituents from the Arab
States and the European and Central Asian regions. Members from these regions are cordially
invited to seek further information from the secretariat and on the Committee’s web page on
the programme and registration modalities for this important capacity-building activity.
The International Labour Standards Department is pleased and honoured once again this year
to place its expertise at the service of your Committee which plays a pivotal role. I wish to take
this opportunity to acknowledge the many invisible colleagues of my department who service
your Committee under the able leadership of Ms Karen Curtis, Chief of the Freedom of
Association Branch, and of Mr Horacio Guido, Chief of the Application of Standards Branch,
who once again this year will accompany me in guiding the secretariat of your Committee. I
would also like to thank the two coordinators of the Committee’s secretariat, Ms Rosinda Silva
and Mr Carlos Magalhaes for their outstanding work. Once again this year, I look forward to
working with you all, Chairperson, Vice-Chairpersons, Reporter, and all the members of the
Committee.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
Statement by the Reporter of the Committee of Experts
On behalf of the Chairperson of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions
and Recommendations, I welcome this invitation to attend the work of the Conference
Committee at the 111th Session of the International Labour Conference, which is characterized
by a return to normality. The Committee of Experts values this participatory practice, which
has been established for several years, as it allows constructive interaction and discussions
that are productive and respectful of our different bodies, which are both committed to the full
application of international labour standards.
During our session in 2022, in addition to the special sitting with the Vice-Chairpersons of your
Committee, the Committee of Experts organized an information session for Government
representatives which offered the occasion for an interesting exchange of views.
We continue to take heed of the concerns expressed by the tripartite constituents in relation
to the operation of the various aspects of the supervisory system, and accordingly, on behalf
of the Committee of Experts, I reiterate our readiness, within the framework of our mandate,
to play an active role in the process of the modernization of certain aspects of the supervisory
system. The Committee of Experts also reaffirms the importance of ensuring that our work
retains the necessary relevance to have a positive impact in relation to the human rights of
workers. This is all the more important in the context of the many crises that are undermining
the world in which we live.
Moreover, in the context of the Subcommittee on Working Methods, the Committee of Experts
is continuing its examination of its working methods, their adaptation and modernization to
achieve maximum efficiency. Among other positive changes put into practice, at our previous
session, we were able to start working for the first time before our arrival in Geneva at the
beginning of the Committee’s session. This was possible as a result of the application of
information technology, through the digitalization of the process of the examination of
government reports and the production of the Committee’s documents. In addition to
improving our productivity, this allowed a more effective use of time. This is also an
appropriate occasion to express our gratitude to the Governing Body for the measures
adopted in this respect, which have enabled the Committee of Experts to organize its work
more flexibly and to have more time for in-depth discussion among the experts, despite the
growing and ever more intense workload.
By way of illustration, I can share with you that the Committee has continued the use of
hyperlinks as a means of improving understanding of its comments and its work by
constituents, and of increasing the visibility of its conclusions. We have also continued to use
tables in the General Report with a view to placing emphasis on urgent appeals and cases of
progress, among other aspects. Moreover, we have continued the practice adopted in recent
years of publishing an executive summary of the General Survey. Also, based on the
recognition that the examination of compliance with international labour standards in the
context of urgent appeals is, in the view of the Committee of Experts, an important element in
promoting dialogue between countries and the supervisory system based on updated
comments, it should be noted that the latest report includes an urgent appeal among the
double footnotes proposed by the Committee of Experts. These small but significant changes
introduced in the presentation of the report of the Committee of Experts are a reflection of our
sustained efforts to achieve greater efficiency in the work of the Committee of Experts as a
part of the ILO supervisory system.
The Committee of Experts dedicated a special sitting to an exchange of views with the
Chairpersons of the UN bodies created under the human rights treaties. During this dialogue,
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
which was very productive, emphasis was placed on the complementarity or our work, the
need to develop new synergies and for greater collaboration and coherence. The exchange led
to the adoption of a joint statement (attached to our report) in which emphasis is placed on
the contribution made by the human rights protection mechanisms, which include the UN
human rights treaty bodies and the ILO supervisory bodies, to reinforcing respect for human
rights and international labour standards at the country level through their analyses and
recommendations, as well as addressing socio-economic development challenges through
human rights-based solutions, placing people and the planet at the centre of the realization of
the 2030 Agenda.
I now turn to the General Survey, which this year covers Conventions Nos 111, 156 and 183,
and Recommendations Nos 111, 165 and 191. The Committee of Experts hopes that its
exhaustive analysis of law and practice in relation to the instruments analysed responds to the
expectations of constituents and will enable them to draw up more effective measures for the
achievement of gender equality at work. In this regard, I would like to emphasize that the
General Survey is particularly timely, as it covers an objective set out in the ILO Centenary
Declaration in relation to “achieving gender equality at work through a transformative agenda”
and accompanies current debates on the promotion of equality at work and the equitable
distribution of care responsibilities.
The General Survey analyses the manner and means by which the six instruments examined
are mutually reinforcing and shows that specific measures are being adopted in many
countries to address the various dimensions of gender inequality at work, including with
regard to issues of maternity protection and family responsibilities covered by Conventions
Nos 156 and 183, which have not been ratified as widely as Convention No. 111. In the General
Survey, the Committee emphasizes that full equality cannot be achieved in the broader current
context of ongoing inequality, and that qualitative and comprehensive change is urgently
needed in the gender dynamics in which gender-specific constraints and structural obstacles
find their origins.
The Committee of Experts notes in its report the creation of the Global Coalition for Social
Justice, which offers a message of hope to women and men facing the harsh reality of periods
of crisis. Within the framework of reinforcing a human-centred future, respect for international
labour standards and supervision of their application will undoubtedly be a crucial element in
finding a way through the multiple crises that are affecting the world of work (conflict, the
challenges of the climate crisis, more deep-rooted poverty and inequality than ever). There is
no doubt that the work of our Committees will be essential tools for the action undertaken in
the context of collaboration under the Global Coalition for Social Justice.
The Committee of Experts also welcomes the decision to include a safe and healthy working
environment among the fundamental principles and rights at work and to recognize
Conventions Nos 155 and 187 as fundamental Conventions. In this regard, we also hope that
the work of the Committee of Experts, both through its comments and its General Surveys, will
provide guidance to Member States in the decisions and measures that they adopt to ensure
a safe and healthy working environment.
I am pleased to be able to tell you that, at our last session, the Committee of Experts welcomed
3 new members, which enabled us to work with the full complement of 20 members. This is
essential for the proper functioning of the Committee, especially in view of its heavy workload.
It is also important to indicate that three other members with long experience of the
Committee’s work and excellent technical and legal knowledge in various areas, ceased to be
members of the Committee last year. The Committee of Experts would be grateful for every
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
effort to be made to fill these vacancies as soon as possible so that the Committee can count
on its full complement of 20 members in order to be able to work with the serenity ensured by
an adequate distribution of the workload.
Before ending my statement, I would like to reaffirm the unshakable commitment of the
Committee of Experts to continue carrying out is work with the highest sense of responsibility,
impartiality and objectivity in fulfilling its mandate, as indicated in paragraph 33 of the General
Report. I once again welcome the privilege of participating in the discussions of the Conference
Committee on the General Report and the General Survey, and wish you all a productive
Conference.
Statement by the Chairperson of the Committee on Freedom of Association
It is an honour and a privilege for me to come once again before your esteemed Committee to
report on the activity of the Committee on Freedom of Association. As a preliminary matter,
allow me to underline the importance of the 75th anniversary of Convention No. 87, which you
will be considering at your current session. The combined anniversary with the Universal
Declaration for Human Rights highlights the nature of this right among the most fundamental
internationally proclaimed human rights. Freedom of association as a means of promoting
individual and collective choice, social and political participation and the ability to lead a
valuable life, is an enabling right allowing for the exercise of all other human rights, starting
with the corollary right to collective bargaining. Collectively protecting and nurturing
democratic participation is central to achieving sustainable development, preventing conflicts,
tackling inequalities and combating discrimination among other things. These higher
aspirations can only be reached when organizations of employers and workers are free to be
established and exercise their activities in full freedom, without intimidation and threats of any
kind. As such, freedom of association is indeed indispensable to paving the way towards social
justice and was thus one of the reasons for the establishment of the special complaints
mechanism over which I preside.
We last met a year ago and since then, the Committee has issued its sixth annual report
covering the year 2022. The Committee’s annual reports are intended to provide helpful
information on the work undertaken by it throughout the year and assist constituents’
understanding of the Committee’s work and functioning. They contain information, supported
by visual statistical data, on the developments over the years in the use of the Committee’s
special procedure, the progress made and the serious and urgent cases examined.
Furthermore, the annual report and its presentation to your august body fulfils an important
objective of the Workers’ and Employers’ groups’ 2015 Joint Statement to support the
complementarity of the ILO supervisory system while avoiding duplication of procedures.
I would like to recall that the role of the Committee on Freedom of Association is to examine
complaints of violations of freedom of association regardless of ratification of the relevant
freedom of association Conventions. The object of the Committee’s complaints procedure is
not to blame governments, but rather to engage in a constructive tripartite dialogue to
propose avenues to ensure the respect of freedom of association in law and practice.
In 2022, the Committee on Freedom of Association examined 59 active cases and 18 cases
concerning the effect given to its recommendations through its follow-up procedure. As
freedom of association is a fundamental right which must be ensured for both workers’ and
employers’ organizations, the Committee had the occasion last year to examine one complaint
brought by an employers’ organization. The allegations received over the year globally covered
both the public and the private sectors. The annual report outlines, among other information,
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
the types of allegations that came before it most often. In 2022, as in the previous year, these
were: protection against acts of anti-union discrimination, violation of collective bargaining
rights and trade union rights and civil liberties.
While much remains to be done, it is my pleasure to inform you that there has been important
progress noted by the Committee on Freedom of Association with interest or satisfaction
during this period. The progress noted has encompassed a variety of measures, including, for
example, legislative amendments to further freedom of association, the signing of new
collective agreements, the removal of restrictions on the applicability of collective bargaining
agreements, the registration and implementation of collective bargaining agreements, the
reinstatement of workers without loss of wages or benefits and the dropping of charges
brought against trade union leaders. I invite you to consult the report which contains tables
and graphs on the cases of progress by type of allegations as well as on the cases of progress
by region.
Aware of the fact that ILO technical assistance is a critically important tool for governments
and social partners alike to resolve outstanding matters, in 2022, the Committee on Freedom
of Association suggested that governments avail themselves of ILO technical assistance in nine
cases, with a view to addressing its conclusions and recommendations.
In order to ensure complementarity, while avoiding duplication, the Committee often
transmits the legislative aspects of cases where governments have ratified the relevant
Conventions to the Committee of Experts. In 2022 – comparable to the numbers covering two
previous years – this practice was used in nine cases. This also ensures a pertinent dialogue
between the Committee on Freedom of Association, a complaints-based procedure, on the one
hand, and the Committee of Experts and your Committee, on the other. The regular review
provided by the Experts and your body provides an important key to ensuring sustainable
progress in respect for freedom of association around the globe.
The engagement over the years with your Committee’s procedures demonstrates that the
Committee on Freedom of Association’s work is well known and appreciated as an authoritative
voice for identifying shortcomings and finding workable solutions, promoting social dialogue
at national level for full resolution. You will recall that just two years ago, the Committee
adjusted its methods of procedure to further promote the space for crucial national dialogue
when the parties to a complaint agree and a few countries have had recourse to national
conciliation measures with the support of the Office, enabling the suspension of the
Committee’s consideration for a period of up to six months.
I am very proud of the work of the Committee on Freedom of Association and would like to
underline the commitment of all its members to ensuring that its outcomes are constructive
and useful to governments and their social partners. As the Conference Committee begins its
important work, may I extend my sincerest wishes for a constructive and fruitful debate that
will further bolster the achievement of our common objectives.
Statement by the Employer members
On behalf of the Employer members, I welcome all Committee members to this discussion. I
also welcome Professor Ago who is listening into the discussion in order to prepare his reply.
This is appreciated as I know from experience, coming from New Zealand, that it is particularly
onerous. We would also like to congratulate the three new members of the Committee of
Experts, Professor Herrera Vergara, Judge Kanyip and Ms Sreenevasan, on their appointment.
This year we finally return to a fully in-person Conference and normal operations after
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
particularly hard years. Hopefully this will facilitate our dialogue and make our work more
effective.
Allow me now to turn to some of the points that the Employer members consider important
for our work. First, we note that this year’s report of the Committee of Experts is sizeable,
containing around 1,000 pages and 656 observations; it certainly is one of the biggest in recent
years. In addition, the Committee of Experts made 1,263 direct requests, which are not
contained in the report itself. This is approximately a 20 per cent change. It is a significant
increase over last year and these figures suggest rather alarming levels of large-scale noncompliance if you take them at face value.
For the Employer members, this once again raises questions about Member States’ approach
to the ratification and application of ILO Conventions. For instance, do Member States carry
out thorough pre-ratification assessments and related changes in law and practice needed to
ensure compliance? Have the national social partners, including representative and
independent employers’ organizations, been adequately consulted? Have their views and
needs been taken into account in the planning of ratification and implementation and, if so,
have Member States followed up on the results of pre-ratification assessments and developed
action plans to ensure correct implementation prior to ratification? The Employer members’
long held view is that ratification should only take place once there is clarity that correct
implementation can be ensured, ideally in a way that reconciles the needs of all tripartite
constituents, including employers of course. The large number of comments made by the
Committee of Experts suggests that pre-ratification preparation is lacking in many instances
and that ratifications are made prematurely or without proper pre-ratification assessment. The
Office has an important role to play here through its promotional activities regarding ILO
Conventions. It should advise and guide constituents to take a careful and considered
approach to ratification. Ratification should come at the end of a process when it is clear that
the envisaged Convention is implementable, not at the beginning. In this regard, it is important
to remember that the ratification of a treaty under international law comes with the obligation
to comply with all of its provisions. We believe that the application of ratified Conventions could
be considerably improved if ratification was approached in a consistent and complianceoriented manner. This would reduce significantly the number of comments by the Committee
of Experts, and thus also the burden on the supervisory system allowing it to focus on the most
serious violations.
The second point that we want to make, is the distinction between direct requests and
observations. This is not the first time that we revert to this distinction in the Committee of
Experts’ report. We note from paragraph 11 of the Report, that the Committee of Experts had
a discussion on the distinction between observations and direct requests and decided as a
result that where observations are accompanied by direct requests, the texts of the latter could
be streamlined. In paragraph 30 of the report, the Committee of Experts states that “the
concerns expressed with regard to certain distinctions between observations and direct
requests were taken very seriously. Without embracing change for the sake of change the
Committee was ready to build inroads based on the criteria of continuous reliability,
predictability, and transparency.” This is rather vague language. We not only wonder what this
means, but also what it will look like when implemented, as we have not perceived changes in
the differentiation between observations and direct requests in this year’s report. For instance,
we find requests for information and assessments of compliance in both observations and
direct requests. Given that direct requests are not usually discussed in the Conference
Committee, by including compliance assessments in direct requests, the Committee of Experts
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
excludes a major part of their standard supervisory work from tripartite scrutiny in this
Committee. That is not how the supervisory system was designed to work.
We therefore, once again, request the Committee of Experts to make any comments that
contain assessments of compliance, whether based on a first or later government report, in
the form of observations. We would also like to recall our alternative proposal to discontinue
direct requests altogether and only issue observations. Mere requests for clarification or
additional information could be informally obtained by the Office from the governments
concerned via email for example, without the need for the Committee of Experts to make
formal direct requests. In our view, this would not only simplify matters but also make the
difference between preparing the information basis for standards supervision, on the one
hand, and the actual standards supervision, on the other, more transparent.
Our third point relates to the Committee of Experts’ exchanges with governments and the
UN human rights treaty bodies. We noted from paragraph 12 of the Report that the Committee
of Experts held an information session with Government representatives on a number of
matters related to standards supervision, including how to streamline Article 22 reports on
similar Conventions to avoid duplication, the criteria for determining which organizations may
be considered as employers’ or workers’ organizations when they submit comments under
article 23.2 of the ILO Constitution, and the follow-up given by the Committee of Experts to
cases referred to it by the Committee on Freedom of Association. These are actually subjects
of interest to all the groups and we therefore respectfully request the Committee of Experts to
provide more detailed information on what was said and possibly agreed in this exchange with
governments.
We also noted from paragraph 13 that a joint reflection took place between the Committee of
Experts and the Chairpersons of seven human rights treaty bodies over ways to strengthen
synergies and complementarities in the context of a repositioned UN development system and
the UN Secretary-General’s Call to Action for Human Rights. While the Employer members
support the idea of creating synergies between the different UN human rights treaties, they
would like to stress the distinct differences between the mandates and competences of each
individual body, as well as the absolute need to not confuse or conflate the unique nature of
the individual international treaties and instruments. The unique feature of international
labour standards is the tripartite framework in which they are created, implemented and
supervised. Within this system, the Committee of Experts has a specific technical role to
perform but it does not represent the ILO standards as such and should not be seen as such.
Unfortunately, in the present joint statement, there is no mention of the tripartite nature of
the ILO standards system.
Fourth, we welcome the continued exchange of views between the Committee of Experts and
the Employer and Worker Vice-Chairpersons of this Committee on the occasion of the special
sitting with the Committee of Experts. We believe that a more structured and in-depth
exchange on specific issues, such as on the interpretation of ILO Conventions, would be of
benefit to the cooperation between the two Committees and the functioning of the entire
supervisory system. A case in point is the various interpretations by the Committee of Experts
on collective bargaining in Article 4 of Convention No. 98. This concerns, for instance, the
question of whether organizations of self-employed workers have a right to collective
bargaining. This is an issue that has been controversially discussed recently in various tripartite
consultations in the ILO. In most jurisdictions only organizations of workers in an employment
relationship have a right to collective bargaining, whereas organizations of self-employed
workers who lack an employer cannot have this right. They are under a different legal regime.
Further questions in this context are: whether, according to Article 4, there exists a preferential
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
level of collective bargaining, whether Article 4 provides for a hierarchy of norms according to
which collective agreements cannot depart from applicable legislation; whether there is a legal
obligation for employers to negotiate under Article 4, or whether compulsory arbitration on
the sole initiative of a workers’ organization is compatible with the voluntary nature of
collective bargaining as reflected in Article 4; whether a country has the right to dictate when
a collective agreement should exist, and whether only a union should decide whether a
collective agreement should exist and the scale and scope of it. These are major questions that
we have – there are obviously many more.
With respect to the question of the right to strike in the context of Convention No. 87, the
Employer members noted that in the Committee’s report, out of the 63 observations on this
Convention, 49 relate partly or exclusively to the right to strike. Moreover, out of 42 direct
requests, 35 also deal, in one way or another, with the right to strike. We have recognized that
the right to strike has significant relevance for national and industrial relations systems and
that countries have established varied and specific legislative practices to deal with this issue.
We would nevertheless recall that the detailed interpretation and assessments by the
Committee of Experts on the right to strike have no basis neither in the text nor in the
legislative history of Convention No. 87. We would also like to remind the Committee of Experts
of the view of the Government group in the Governing Body, according to which the conditions
and practice of the right to strike is to be defined at the national level. In view of the recent
discussion on a possible referral of this contentious issue to the International Court of Justice
the Employer members are more than ever convinced that a realistic and sustainable solution
can only be found through discussion within the ILO’s tripartite fora and procedures. As the
interpretation of the Committee of Experts and the Office is at the origin of this dispute, we
once again respectfully call upon them to contribute to the search for a tripartite consensus
instead of remaining inactive and continuing as in the past.
In terms of the needs of sustainable enterprises, we would like to recall the importance of
paying more attention to these needs in standards’ supervision. We are of the opinion that the
Committee of Experts neglects this central question. Sustainable enterprises comply with
national laws and regulations and contribute to economic growth, employment creation and
socio-economic progress. The UN 2030 Agenda has recognized the central role of enterprises
in solving societal challenges through responsible business conduct, innovation and
collaboration. The ILO Centenary Declaration states that international labour standards also
need to respond to the changing patterns of the world of work, protect workers, take into
account the needs of sustainable enterprises and be subject to authoritative supervision.
Giving due attention to the needs of sustainable enterprises would improve the balance of the
Committee of Experts’ observations and thus relevance and acceptance of their
recommendations.
Lastly, on the topic of social justice, with regard to the section in the Committee of Experts’
Report on the “Application of International Labour Standards and the quest for social justice in
the context of protracted and interlocking crises”, in particular, the Committee of Experts’
explicit support for the launch of a Global Coalition for Social Justice and the urgent need of a
new social contract, we have concerns. These are not matters related to the supervision of
labour standards. The Committee of Experts has no mandate, in our view, to be a political
advocate. Our concern is deepened by the fact that these proposals are still all under
discussion and require adoption by the tripartite constituents in the competent ILO bodies. We
believe that the Committee of Experts should have recognized this and hope that it will exercise
more restraint on similar issues in future.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
In conclusion, we would like to reaffirm our commitment to the ILO standards supervisory
system as a key governance tool in the advancement of universal social justice. In saying that,
we also say that the priority of the Committee of Experts, and indeed the Committee on the
Application of Standards, should be to ensure that their focus stays on monitoring and
supervising the compliance of Member States with Conventions they have ratified; leave
politics to others. But we also recognize that in order for ILO standards and their supervision
to have real and lasting impact, both need to be adapted to the constantly evolving situations
and needs of Member States and the world in general. With that in mind, we look forward to
cooperating with both governments and worker representatives of this session of the
Conference Committee.
Statement by the Worker members
Worker members: It is important to mention that today is a useful time to discuss ways of
increasing the impact of the supervisory system as a whole. I will focus more on the
relationship between our Committee – the Committee on the Application of Standards – and
the Committee of Experts. Let us recall that these are two independent bodies that seek to
develop a certain complementarity. In addition, our Committee is not called upon to exercise
any kind of oversight over the Committee of Experts, which carries out its mission in
impartiality and independence. The Workers’ group continue to attach the utmost importance
to these features, which are guarantees of credibility for the Committee.
We also support the modernization of the supervisory system. However, this modernization
must roll out taking into consideration the importance of preserving the fundamental aspects
that guarantee the balance of our system. It is with this in mind that we note the meeting of
the Committee of Experts with the governments. These exchanges can be interesting on
several fronts, particularly to better explain the expectations and reciprocal points of view.
Nevertheless, in our opinion, there is a thin line between constructive dialogue on the one
hand and an exertion of influence on the other. It is our conviction that the Committee of
Experts is also aware of these limits. Certain issues that were the subject of discussions at this
year’s meeting give cause for concern. I mention, for example, the question of how the
Committee of Experts interprets the notion of the representative organization of workers and
employers – a question which seems to us inappropriate, to say the least. The same applies to
the idea of rationalizing the reports that governments send to the various UN monitoring
bodies. We see the value of improving certain aspects, but it is important to avoid diluting the
specificities of ILO supervision.
We note with interest the reflection and follow-up carried out by the Committee of Experts
concerning the impact of crises on labour standards. This responds to a wish expressed by the
Worker members at our 2021 session. We invite the Committee of Experts to continue this
exercise. I would like to draw your attention to the issues that the Committee of Experts
identified in its General Report concerning social protection, particularly in the post-COVID-19
context. We must certainly continue to think about ways to address long COVID and take note
of the concerns expressed by that Committee in this regard pertaining to the Netherlands.
More generally, the developments covered in the report give us a perspective on the many
challenges that we must highlight with regard to compliance with standards. We have already
expressed several times that the supervisory system should focus on ways to have a bigger
impact.
100. The Employer members often comes back to the importance of taking account of enterprise
sustainability in the examination of compliance with standards. We have already spoken
extensively on this subject but allow me to be more specific. If we are to follow this logic, it
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
would be enough to unilaterally assert that a standard is at the detriment of enterprise
sustainability for this standard to be set aside. This could lead, for example, to a restriction to
the right to form trade unions because the exercise of this right could reduce the profits of an
enterprise. This reasoning leads to stalemate. We emphasize that the aim of the ILO’s mandate
is to promote social justice through worker protection. Enterprise development is a means and
not an end for the realization of social justice.
101. More generally, we consider that it is not necessary for the Committee of Experts to align itself
with the wishes of each group or country in order that its work be effective. On the contrary, it
is essential that, collectively, we reflect on the specific ways in which we can have a bigger
impact. To this end, we have two proposals. Firstly, it would undoubtedly be useful to take
greater account of the situation of the countries we are called upon to discuss or highlight.
Ratification of a Convention entails the same obligations for all governments. The country
situation can, however, vary, for example due to an acute crisis. We may have to look at this so
as to adapt the form and nature of the supervision that our committees carry out. In order to
avoid misunderstandings, I specify that what we are talking about here is not the content of
the standards but rather how to ensure compliance and, moreover, what the most appropriate
tools are to ensure the effectiveness of standards, while taking account of the country
situations.
102. The second proposal concerns the importance of having a fairly specific inventory of the
actions and measures taken for the implementation of our Committee’s conclusions. This could
be a helpful way of having continuous monitoring of certain cases. The case of India comes to
mind, which we discussed in 2019 and on which we are very interested in having more
information. It should be pointed out that the information that the Office has kindly posted on
our Committee’s web page, with regard to the monitoring of cases, can certainly serve as a
basis in this regard.
103. We also note with interest the appendix to the report of the Committee of Experts. You will
recall that we already welcomed the Committee’s efforts to increase synergies with other UN
monitoring bodies. This appendix illustrates this momentum and confirms the credibility of the
Committee of Experts vis-à-vis with other UN bodies. Echoing what I said earlier, this exercise
must, of course, be carried out with respect for the ILO’s specificities.
104. I would like to add something else, which has not been prepared in advance but which is a kind
of reaction to the fact that there are long-standing differences of opinion on the right to strike.
We will return to this in our closing speech to set out our position on the subject. But what I
would like to say here is that it is not the Conference Committee that has the mandate to
discuss the legal perspective relating to the right to strike. It is not under the competence or
mandate of our Committee to discuss this. Whatever body or institution it comes through, it
pertains to other entities within the ILO. There have been agreements and decisions, and we
have to live with these agreements and decisions. The Conference Committee session is not
the place or the time for such discussions, while we are addressing various individual cases
and discussing the proper application of ratified Conventions.
105. Echoing what I said earlier, our undertaking must be carried out with respect for the ILO
specificities. So, I conclude by daring to hope that we will be in a position to continue our
exchanges with a view to improving our respective modes of operation, by avoiding issues that
lead to stalemates.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
Statement by Government members
106. Government member, Algeria: Progress has been made in the Conference Committee’s
working methods, as set out in document D.1 presented to us, in terms of visibility this year,
thanks to the tripartite dialogue in the informal consultations on the Committee’s working
methods. However, these consultations should be expanded so that the preliminary and final
lists of individual cases are published in advance, in order to give governments more time to
prepare and present arguments on certain aspects that are vital to the discussion. Regarding
the adoption of the conclusions, we are of the view that it is certainly important to take our
time.
107. Moreover, the list of individual cases drawn up should primarily reflect the observations and
recommendations of the Committee of Experts and the Committee on Freedom of Association,
based on the reports submitted by governments, in accordance with article 22 of the
ILO Constitution, and avoid the selection of countries for political reasons or interests that
undermine the credibility of the supervisory procedure.
108. Lastly, it is important that the Worker members and Employer members inform governments
of the conditions under which they have assessed the cases and how the criteria are applied
to establish the final list of countries, so that a constructive dialogue in our Committee may
strengthen tripartism and thus lead to the adoption of balanced conclusions to help
governments better fulfil their obligations under ratified Conventions.
109. Government member, Sweden speaking on behalf of the European Union 5 (EU) and its
Member States: The candidate countries, Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, North Macedonia,
the Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, the potential candidate country Georgia, the EFTA
countries, Iceland and Norway, members of the European Economic Area aligned themselves
with this statement.
110. We welcome the discussion of the Conference Committee, a crucial pillar of the supervisory
system, and appreciate that we are back to our normal schedule with 24 cases. We strongly
believe in the fundamental importance of international labour standards, the ratification and
the effective and authoritative supervision of their implementation. We highly appreciate the
analysis and the expertise of the Committee of Experts shown in the General Report, which
provides a solid basis for the work of our Committee. We recall our strong commitment to the
independence, objectivity and impartiality of the Committee of Experts. We appreciate the
information session with the Committee of Experts last year and look forward to a new meeting
this year.
111. The EU and its Member States also welcome the joint statement by the ILO Committee of
Experts and the UN human rights treaty bodies that is inspired by the UN Secretary-General’s
Call to Action for Human Rights. The common values of peace, freedom, equal rights, human
dignity, social justice and the rule of law are universal, complementary and mutually
reinforcing. We share the view that human rights, including international labour standards,
are fundamental for relations between peoples and nations, and that continuously
undermining the exercise of fundamental rights and further shrinking civic space, will
exacerbate the already protracted and interlocking crises the world faces. Through the
Unless otherwise specified, all statements made by Government members on behalf of regional groups or
intergovernmental organizations, are reported as having been made on behalf of all Government members of the group or
organization in question, who are members of the lLO and are attending the Conference.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy, we put an increased emphasis on human
rights, including labour rights.
112. The Russian Federation’s war of aggression against Ukraine not only grossly violates
international law and the principles of the UN Charter but is also incompatible with the aims
and purposes of this organization and the principles governing ILO membership. The EU and
its Member States strongly condemn the unprovoked and unjustified war of aggression and
its devastating impact on the world of work and labour rights in Ukraine, including for
seafarers stranded in Ukrainian ports and workers in the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, as
well as the wider ramifications across the globe. We reaffirm our steadfast support for the
return to the global rules-based order, with the UN, including the ILO, at its core. We therefore
welcome that the Committee of Experts will follow up on the resolution of March 2022, within
the framework of its mandate and also the Committee’s call in light of Russia’s war of
aggression against Ukraine, of preserving seafarers’ rights as enshrined in the Maritime
Labour Convention, 2006.
113. We welcome the historic decision taken by the ILO last year, to include a safe and healthy
working environment in the ILO’s framework of fundamental principles and rights at work. All
EU Member States will strive to ratify the related fundamental ILO Conventions, since we truly
believe that ratification, implementation of, and compliance with all fundamental ILO
Conventions, should not only contribute to the protection and promotion of human rights,
including labour rights, but also to the larger objectives of building social and economic
stability, as well as inclusive and equitable societies all over the world.
114. We welcome the part of the General Report on the Application of International Labour
Standards and the quest for social justice in the context of the protracted and interlocking
crises. We strongly support the Global Coalition for Social Justice initiative, its aim and its
ambition. It comes at a critical juncture where there is an urgent need to advance social justice
questions globally and beyond the ILO. We share the hopeful message of the Committee of
Experts that the Global Coalition for Social Justice will mobilize a wide range of partnerships,
leading to concrete progress in the effective exercise of labour rights at country level. This
initiative should rely on international labour standards and their supervision as a compass
towards sustainable development. We are committed to championing decent work, including
through strengthening fundamental principles and rights at work, and addressing the impact
of COVID-19. This commitment is reaffirmed in the EU’s bilateral and regional trade investment
agreements, in unilateral preferential trade schemes, as well as through our continued support
for ILO technical assistance.
115. Building support for international labour standards through extended cooperation across the
multilateral system with the support of the UN family is also key to ensure that these standards
continue to guide and be part of recovery policies, while also contributing to the achievement
of the Sustainable Development Goals. We are convinced that a well-functioning and
authoritative supervisory system, tripartism and social dialogue are critical to ensure the
credibility of the Organization’s work as a whole. We will continue to fully support the ILO
normative system, as we remain convinced that it is one of the most valuable examples of a
multilateral rules-based order which, we feel, is under attack. We are looking forward to a
constructive engagement with tripartite constituents during the debate in this Committee.
Reply of the Reporter of the Committee of Experts
116. I would like to thank you for the opportunity to attend the work of the Conference Committee,
which is an important pillar of the ILO supervisory system, so that I can report to the
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
Committee of Experts on the discussions. Thank you very much for adjusting your meeting
schedule to accommodate the time difference between Japan and Europe. Be assured that I
was able to follow your discussions online.
117. At the outset, allow me to recall that the Committee of Experts has invited the two
Vice-Chairpersons of your Committee to a common reflection on how to work in mutually
reinforcing ways towards securing compliance with the conclusions adopted by the
Conference Committee on the cases considered each year. The Committee of Experts trusts
that the special sitting with the Vice-Chairpersons could serve as a forum for an exchange on
this crucial aspect of making the supervisory system more effective.
118. With regard to questions of interpretation of international labour standards, the Committee of
Experts, while emphasizing the independent nature of its work, follows with great interest the
discussions taking place on this subject in the appropriate forum, which is the ILO Governing
Body.
119. With regard to the distinction between observations and direct requests, allow me to recall
that the Committee of Experts has established criteria differentiating between the two types
of comments and these appear in its General Report. The Committee strives to apply the
criteria consistently, even though this is not an exact science. At its last meeting, the Committee
took a decision to streamline, as of its next session, the text of direct requests when they
accompany observations. This effort to streamline the two types of comments will be reflected
in the Committee’s 2024 report.
120. With regard to questions raised on the information session with Government representatives,
allow me to recall that, as indicated by the Chairperson of the Committee of Experts last year,
this information session was organized at the margins of the Committee of Experts’ 2022
session, as a response to an earlier request by certain Government members of your
Committee. In a spirit of tripartism, the Committee gave positive consideration to this request,
acknowledging that governments constitute an indispensable link for the effective ratification,
application and reporting on international labour standards under articles 22 and 19 of the ILO
Constitution. This informal session provided an opportunity for representatives of the
Committee of Experts, and not the full Committee, to clarify certain questions raised by
governments. Its purpose was not to discuss any specific country situation nor to lead to any
kind of decisions.
121. The Committee of Experts is also pleased to have reinvigorated the traditional ties it has
maintained with other treaty bodies over many decades due to similarities in their respective
composition and the important synergies among the instruments they supervise. This does
not affect in any way each body’s specific mandate and particularities, nor does it have any
incidence on the respective instruments and the supervisory mechanisms through which they
are supervised. The important aspect here is the fact that the ILO’s international labour
standards and supervision of their application is a basic part of the overall efforts of the
international community to protect human rights, which were preceded by standards.
122. I would like to thank all the members of the Conference Committee for their comments on the
General Survey entitled Achieving gender equality at work. I acknowledge the positive feedback
provided on the quality of the General Survey and the vast array of good practices it has
identified. I am also pleased to witness that Committee members have widely reaffirmed their
commitment towards gender equality at work and non-discrimination in employment and
occupation, and that some Member States are considering the ratification of relevant ILO
instruments. The discussions show that gender equality remains a common objective for all,
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
and that the elimination of discrimination, the provision of maternity protection and the
consideration of workers with family responsibilities are fundamental to this end.
123. While there have been advances towards gender equality, progress has stalled in recent
decades, in particular with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Nevertheless, by no means
does this imply that ILO constituents are inactive. I welcome the extensive information
provided by the ILO tripartite constituents on measures adopted in their countries to promote
gender equality at work. These include legislation, national policies and strategies, social
dialogue initiatives, collective agreements, and campaigns and other actions for awarenessraising.
124. Allow me to address some of the points raised. As regards the topic-driven perspective of the
General Survey, the approach followed by the Committee of Experts reflected the key
contributions of the instruments examined towards the achievement of gender equality at
work through a transformative agenda, as highlighted in the Governing Body discussions and
the ILO Centenary Declaration. In this regard, I am pleased to note that the discussions
significantly underscored the key interlinkages between the instruments examined, as well as
with other relevant international labour standards, such as Convention No. 100 on equal
remuneration and Convention No. 190 on violence and harassment in the world of work. The
General Survey’s goal is to provide an overview of existing national law and practice of Member
States, that is to show the extent to which Members have given effect to the standards
examined, including new laws or emerging practices or trends, regardless of whether they are
adopted widely or by a limited number of countries. It also aims to reflect on ratification
challenges, when information thereon is provided in the reports received.
125. In relation to paternity and long-term leave, the Committee of Experts has recalled that a
number of countries have explicitly introduced these types of leave in their national legislation
to cope with societal, demographic and organizational changes. The Committee welcomed this
trend as a good practice that helps workers combine work and family responsibilities.
Regarding the health and safety of pregnant and breastfeeding women and their children, the
Committee of Experts has emphasized that affordable and adequate medical care, including
prenatal care, is essential to guarantee that women do not have to make a choice between
health and income security. In this regard, the Committee of Experts recalled that health
protection measures for pregnancy and maternity should not be the sole burden of enterprises
and are the shared responsibility of governments and society.
126. Finally, I observe that your Committee underlined the need for governments to work with
workers and employers on cross-cutting policies to achieve gender equality. These should
promote societal change, address structural barriers and combat gender-based stereotypes.
Measures adopted should also respond to the evolving patterns of the world of work, while
protecting workers and taking into account the needs of sustainable enterprises.
127. I will convey all the opinions expressed during this discussion at the forthcoming session of
the Committee of Experts in November–December 2023 through Ms Graciela Dixon Caton, the
Chairperson of the Committee of Experts. Once again, thank you for the opportunity to engage
with your Committee’s work. This is a very valued aspect of our constructive engagement. I
look forward to our continued dialogue.
Reply of the representative of the Secretary-General
128. I wish to start by thanking all the speakers who contributed to the discussion of the General
Report of the Committee of Experts and the discussion of the General Survey. In response to
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
the debate, I identified four issues on which you have expressed interesting views or called for
more information from the Office.
129. Let me first address the role of the Office in respect of the promotion of ratification. I heard
the Employer and Worker spokespersons calling for an increased role of the Office in this
regard, but potentially from different perspectives. As indicated in the Programme and Budget,
the Office does indeed quite actively promote the ratification of Conventions by Member States
and we do this in the context of a targeted ratification campaign for all instruments, the
fundamental Conventions clearly, but also the governance and technical Conventions. This is
also done as a follow-up to the SRM. The promotion of ratification in the context of the followup to the SRM aims primarily to invite those governments that are still party to outdated
Conventions to ratify the most modern instrument in the same area, knowing that for some of
these outdated instruments the Governing Body has already decided a date for their
abrogation. Further to these decisions, we are indeed actively promoting the ratification of the
most modern instruments by those Member States and some of you may be familiar with the
letters we have sent out, as well as with the pyramids that we have prepared to try to simplify
your understanding of the decisions resulting from the SRM tripartite working group. I see a
few nods in the room, that gives me assurance.
130. So let me say a few words about how we promote ratification in view of some of the comments
made by the Employer members and also a call for more action on the part of the Office from
the Worker members. The first thing we do when we promote ratification is to advocate
tripartite engagement in this discussion at the national level and offer technical assistance
upon request. We advise on the content of the Convention considered for ratification, and also
provide assistance in undertaking the analysis of national legislation and practice vis-à-vis the
Convention, in order to assess whether there are any gaps that might need to be filled, either
in the legislation of the countries concerned or in their practice. We also have a large portfolio
of technical advisory services on labour law reform, in the context of which we provide very
detailed technical memoranda on legislation that can be adjusted, in view of the contemplated
ratification.
131. In all parts of ILO technical advisory services, we offer to facilitate tripartite consultation. Of
course, we cannot impose this but we strongly encourage it, and when it is taken up, we
facilitate it. So, on this point I wish to conclude by saying that as we will soon start planning the
implementation of our next Programme and Budget, we will take into full consideration the
various comments and suggestions that we have heard in your discussion today.
132. The second point that you have raised relates to the information provided to your Committee
concerning the follow-up to your conclusions. The Worker spokesperson emphasized the
importance of this information being available and updated regularly. I just want to assure you
that we have taken good note of that.
133. I have also noted certain comments supporting the modernization of the standards-related
activities and I would like to put that into perspective in relation to the discussion that you have
just held on the failure to fulfil reporting obligations. I want to do so because one part of the
modernization of standards-related activities will be related to reporting methods in the future.
We are aware that it is a burden that can be heavy, particularly for countries that have ratified
a certain number of Conventions and, as I indicated in my opening statement, we have begun
a process of reflection on this subject. At the same time, I have also heard many calls or
comments appreciating the technical assistance provided by the Office to help countries fulfil
their reporting obligations. And I would just like to point out that, in the context of the
modernization of the ILO’s standards-related activities, one of the components of this
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
programme of activities is intended to reinforce technical assistance at the national level.
Clearly, therefore, all of your calls for more technical assistance to ensure that reporting
obligations are met in full by all Member States will be taken fully into account.
134. As indicated by the statement of the Government member of the Central African Republic
during the discussion on serious failures, technical assistance by the Office is available and can
play an important role in helping Member States to comply with their standards-related
obligations. I am pleased to inform you that the vacant posts for international labour standards
and labour law specialists in Yaoundé and San José have been filled and our new colleagues
are currently following the discussion in the Committee so that they can effectively serve the
constituents in their respective subregions.
135. Finally, I would like to conclude my reply by referring to your discussion on the General Survey.
The high number of speakers is in my view an indicator of the pertinence of the General Survey
and that a discussion of the subject in the Committee was timely. As indicated by the
Chairperson, when closing the discussion, your debate was rich, and I am not just using that
term for rhetorical purposes, as I particularly appreciated the numerous interventions which
drew the attention of all the members of the Committee to the latest developments at the
national level in terms of legislative changes and also the adoption of inclusive policies in
relation to gender equality. This information is very useful. Some of it had not yet been drawn
to our attention and the fact that it will now be reflected in your report will shed further light
on future examinations by the supervisory bodies of the implementation of Conventions
Nos 111, 156 and 183, which are so important. With this final comment and my gratitude once
again for your involvement in this discussion, I would like to thank you for your attention.
Concluding remarks
136. Worker members: I would like to begin by thanking the Office for the explanations and replies
which have been shared with our Committee. We have heard a series of observations which in
fact have not surprised us. They follow on directly from discussions which we have already had
and which seem increasingly pointless. In general, I would say that these observations stem
from a persistent misunderstanding regarding the independence and autonomy of the
Committee of Experts and regarding the relationship between our two Committees. Just now,
as part of the discussion on the General Survey, the EU members formulated an excellent reply
on this matter, explaining this important distinction very well. So yes, we have heard
statements regarding respect for the independence of the Committee of Experts, but no
sooner have they been delivered than these statements are challenged or called into question
by certain requests which, precisely, undermine this independence. I will illustrate my remark
by coming back to several points.
137. Concerns have been expressed regarding the size of the report. However, the report merely
reflects the problems encountered in the application of standards in the world. In our view,
making this an issue of quantity misses the point. We have already had an exchange on the
distinction that the Committee of Experts makes between direct requests and observations.
The Worker members have also requested clarification on this matter in the past. It is time to
accept the autonomy of the Committee of Experts as regards the organization of its work and
the options which it considers most appropriate. The Committee maintains an ongoing
dialogue with the Member States and is in a position to evaluate the tools which enable
progress to be made on the points that it raises.
138. I would also like to rectify another misunderstanding which suggests that our Committee is
supposed to undertake a tripartite examination of the report of the Committee of Experts. We
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
are not here to correct that report. The EU Members also drew attention to this just now in the
context of the discussion on the General Survey. We are not here to correct the report of the
Committee of Experts but to hold a calm dialogue on the relationship between our two
Committees. Saying that direct requests prevent this examination is a very risky statement, in
our view.
139. It has also been suggested once again that governments should undertake an evaluation
exercise before ratification. We would like to reassure everyone that to our knowledge no
government proceeds with ratification lightly. It is often the fruit of a long process which
includes a dialogue with the constituents, in consultation with the Office. But the more
problematic aspect of this statement is thinking that once conformity with a ratified
Convention has been achieved, it stays that way for ever. However, it often happens that a
government is in conformity and then the situation takes a turn for the worse. This, by the way,
is the whole raison d’être of the supervisory bodies: if ratification guaranteed conformity, we
would not be here today and the supervisory task would be irrelevant.
140. The Committee of Experts has also been accused of welcoming the idea of launching a coalition
on social justice on the grounds that this point is supposedly still under discussion at the ILO.
For us, this calls into question the autonomy of the Committee of Experts, whose members are
neither secretaries for the tripartite constituents nor their spokespersons. They have the
freedom to express their views on behalf of their Committee regarding a proposal which forms
part of the mandate of the Organization, even if the exact procedures involved are not yet
known.
141. The position of the Employer members regarding the right to strike has also been recalled. We
have made several points in this regard but wish to reiterate our refusal to see our Committee
become the forum for a discussion which should be held elsewhere. Nor can I see the role that
the Committee of Experts might play in the solution to this divergence of views, given that the
ILO Constitution provides for specific means to achieve that, as we have stated on several
occasions.
142. I will not dwell on the Employer members’ unilateral interpretation of Article 4 of Convention,
No. 98, as we have already addressed this point in the past and our views are known and
remain unchanged. I will merely underline the fact that persisting with this stance is
incompatible with respect for the autonomy of the Committee of Experts.
143. The Worker members consider that discussions are needed to enable progress towards
effective implementation of international labour standards and suggest vigorously that the
proposals they have made to improve the impact of the supervisory system are analysed and
made the subject of an in-depth discussion. Modernization is not about endlessly reviving
outmoded discussions; rather, it is about considering ways of creating an outlook for the
future.
144. Employer members: At the outset, I would like to thank the Government and the Worker
members for their rich and interesting contributions to the General Discussion and to the
discussion on the General Survey. We also greatly appreciate the reply of the representative of
the Secretary-General and we await with interest the statement from Professor Ago in relation
to the Committee of Experts. Indeed, the presence of Professor Ago on behalf of the
Chairperson of the Committee of Experts and the ongoing dialogue between the Committee
of Experts and the Conference Committee is important, not only for the ILO constituents to
better understand standards-related requirements, but also to facilitate the Committee of
Experts’ understanding of the realities and needs of the users of the supervisory system.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
145. It is thus of utmost importance in our view to build as much convergence as possible between
the Conference Committee and the Committee of Experts in order to provide effective and
practical guidance to tripartite constituents in ILO Member States. We wish to respond to some
of the remarks that were made by various contributors earlier in the General Discussion.
146. First, we consider the work of the Committee of Experts as vital to the successful functioning
of the Conference Committee and the regular standards supervision as a whole. In this regard,
it is equally vital that the Conference Committee provides its views on the interpretation and
application of international labour standards in an independent manner, while taking into
account the reality of the world of work. We agree with the Worker members that standards
supervision must preserve balance. However, this means that the Committee of Experts should
consider both the perspectives of the Worker members and the promotion of an enabling
environment for sustainable enterprises, as set out in the ILO Centenary Declaration. Contrary
to the Worker members’ views, the consideration of one does not mean undermining the
other. We believe the Committee of Experts should in fact promote both of these views equally.
147. Second, once again and regrettably, we have to come back on the view that the Conference
Committee had no mandate to discuss the right to strike. The Committee has a comprehensive
competence to examine the compliance by countries with ratified Conventions. As long as the
Committee of Experts continues to provide detailed interpretation of the right to strike, in the
context of Convention No. 87, the Conference Committee must be able to at least respond. We
do not consider that the proposals discussed by the Governing Body at its March 2023 session
to refer the dispute to the International Court of Justice or an in-house tribunal are in fact the
most effective means of reconciling these different views. For a start, these proposals do not
take into account that the origin of the dispute is in fact the interpretation by the Committee
of Experts. In other words, without that, we would not have this dispute. We simply request
the Committee of Experts and the Office, as a key part of the standards supervisory bodies, to
facilitate a solution rather than simply continue down the current path. We strongly believe
that the question of whether there should be international rules on the right to strike and if so,
what they should look like, can only be meaningfully addressed through social dialogue and
the available and competent ILO bodies. For example, an ILO tripartite technical meeting, or a
dedicated discussion at the Conference on the law and practice in Member States on the right
to strike, or a mediation process, or even the possibility of standard-setting, could all be
considered to try and settle the existing interpretation issue. We regret that such tripartite
events have never taken place before and we strongly believe that the time has come to look
at this as an option. Such an approach could ensure that all ILO constituents actively engage
in the process, that solutions are based on consensus and that outcomes adopted are
universally relevant and accepted.
148. That said, let me be clear that we do not mean to instruct the Committee of Experts on how to
provide non-binding assessments, but we do consider that it is important for that Committee
not to create new obligations beyond what has been intended and agreed by the tripartite
constituents at the Conference. In other words, it is not acceptable that the flexibility for
implementation deliberately granted in Conventions to Member States is then later restricted
by unilateral interpretations by the Committee of Experts.
149. Let me turn now to the General Survey. We made comprehensive submissions to the General
Survey and we heard many other views as well. We agreed with the Committee of Experts on
many points but also respectfully expressed our disagreement on some of its views and
findings. In doing so, we have sought to contribute to a broader and more factual debate and
we thank others who have done so. We considered the instruments selected for the General
Survey to be particularly timely and pertinent for us in present times, notably due to the fact
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
that the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated continuing inequalities for women and girls around
the world. In our view, the achievement of gender equality and non-discrimination, support to
workers with family responsibilities and maternity protection are critical for social, economic
and business development. Yet, we have expressed legitimate concerns regarding the scope,
content and effective implementation of the instruments examined in the General Survey, as
well as regarding the format of the General Survey itself. Overall, we brought to the
Committee’s attention the need to promote inclusive, balanced and effective implementation
in consultation with the most representative social partners to ensure that realities and
circumstances are adequately taken into account.
150. In conclusion, the Employer members look forward to ongoing exchanges between the
Conference Committee and the Committee of Experts. We look forward to more opportunities
for dialogue to continue building convergence on matters of application of international labour
standards. We count on the Office, in particular the International Labour Standards
Department, which plays a decisive role in the preparatory work to facilitate dialogue and the
building of convergence.
151. We would like to reaffirm our full commitment to continue improving the international labour
standards system, including regular standards supervision, to ensure it remains credible,
relevant, balanced and transparent, as the ILO continues in its second century. For the
standards supervisory system to contribute to a sustainable and resilient recovery, it is
necessary to have clear, relevant and balanced assessments and recommendations. Past
experience has demonstrated that where the Conference Committee and the Committee of
Experts reached converging views, more positive responses were obtained from governments
and social partners on the ground, leading to faster, better and more sustainable compliance
with ILO standards, both in law and in practice. Unity on the essentials seems all the more
important in the face of an uncertain world, that we are increasingly confronted with as
evidenced by the pandemic and the war in Ukraine.
Reports requested under article 19 of the Constitution
General Survey: Achieving gender equality at work
152. The Committee dedicated two sittings to the discussion of the General Survey carried out by
the Committee of Experts concerning the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation)
Convention, 1958 (No. 111), the Workers with Family Responsibilities Convention, 1981
(No. 156), the Maternity Protection Convention, 2000 (No. 183), the Discrimination
(Employment and Occupation) Recommendation, 1958 (No. 111), the Workers with Family
Responsibilities Recommendation, 1981 (No. 165) and the Maternity Protection
Recommendation, 2000 (No. 191). The record of this discussion is contained in section I of
Part Two of this report.
Concluding remarks
153. At the meeting on the adoption of the outcome of the discussions, the following statements
were made by members of the Committee.
154. Employer members: The discussion on the General Survey was very good and brought
together a lot of diverse views in a way, which I think is reflected very well and very
comprehensively in the report. I think the latter will serve, not just as a record of our discussion,
but as a platform or a guideline towards focusing on a number of issues of importance to
everybody. Gender equity is a particularly important issue across the world and this report will
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
help reinforce the debate, and serve as a tool for governments, employers and workers alike.
I commend the report to the Committee.
155. Worker members: We are pleased to be able to adopt strong conclusions that take into
account the rich discussion we have had. It could not be otherwise with a theme as
fundamental as this year’s. Gender equality lies at the heart of the ILO’s mandate, at the heart
of the promotion and realization of social justice and decent work. The General Survey has
enabled us not only to highlight the progress made in certain countries, but also to become
fully aware of the precarious situation of many women in many countries. We cannot deny that
we still face today many enormous challenges to achieving gender equality. Women still face
significant disadvantages in the world of work – disadvantages which are very often
cumulative. They also face less visible forms of discrimination, such as indirect and
intersectional discrimination. The proportion of women in the informal economy, in specific
sectors and in forms of precarious occupations or, depending on the conditions, jobs, is often
higher. These sectors or forms of work have a severe lack of social protection coverage and
are often characterized by much lower wages which harshly penalize women in all aspects of
their lives. The persisting dynamic of occupational segregation is also highlighted in our
conclusions. This dynamic is generated by widespread societal perceptions about the
distribution of roles between men and women, and the unequal distribution of family
responsibilities. It is important to combat these outdated perceptions and rebalance the
unequal distribution of roles.
156. We also discussed at length the specific and persistent discrimination faced by mothers.
Maternity protection is fundamental if we wish to achieve gender equality. The adoption of
measures providing full protection of maternity, particularly maternal medical care, health and
safety measures, maternity leave and the related benefits are crucially important. The
Committee of Experts noted that imposing total or partial direct financing of these measures
by employers could in practice lead to discrimination against women. While employers keen to
develop sustainable enterprises should ideally ensure that their enterprises fully respect the
obligations of non-discrimination, our conclusions call on Member States to progressively
develop systems of social security based on blended finance mechanisms or contributions.
These mechanisms must necessarily be based on the principles of collective financing,
solidarity and risk-sharing. Such systems can only function if employers fully commit to
guaranteeing their fair share of contributions, without constantly seeking to reduce them.
157. Gender equality will not come out of nowhere. It requires commitment and investment. The
Member States must invest in quality care services and infrastructure to enable a more
egalitarian division of family responsibilities, both within families and between families and the
State. The potential of digital and green economies to promote gender equality cannot be
underestimated. They present employment opportunities for women. The many challenges
that I have just recalled require us to step up our efforts and adopt new approaches to confront
them. This is a shared responsibility. Both the Member States and the social partners must
ensure that the policies and measures aimed at gender equality are effectively implemented
in the workplace. They must also actively promote the needed deep social change. It is only
through a strong tripartite social dialogue, in which women are fully represented, that gender
equality may be realized.
158. The prominent role of our great Organization in realizing this objective is not to be
underestimated. Moreover, we recall in our conclusions the importance that ILO technical
assistance represents in this area. ILO research activities are also important. In particular, they
will enable the development of more specific guidelines to assist Member States in the
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
development of effective measures and policies, with a view to working towards gender
equality.
159. We conclude with a call to all Member States who have not yet done so, to envisage ratifying
the Conventions examined within the framework of the General Survey. This message is
perfectly clear, and we hope that it will be heard and given effect in the many Member States.
Let us ratify Conventions Nos 111, 156 and 183. May we add that the Member States who wish
to fully tackle gender inequality may envisage the ratification of other Conventions. We have
seen that many other Conventions can also contribute to the realization of gender equality. Let
us also ratify all those Conventions. We thus ask the ILO to follow up on these conclusions and
continue to make every effort to ensure the promotion of the ratification of all relevant
Conventions to achieve gender equality in the world of work.
Outcome of the discussion of the General Survey
160. The Committee approved the outcome of its discussion, which is reproduced below.
Introduction
161. The Committee welcomed the opportunity to examine the General Survey carried out by the
Committee of Experts on Achieving Gender Equality at Work, which encompassed six
instruments relevant to gender equality: the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation)
Convention, 1958 (No. 111), the Workers with Family Responsibilities Convention, 1981
(No. 156), the Maternity Protection Convention, 2000 (No. 183), the Discrimination
(Employment and Occupation) Recommendation, 1958 (No. 111), the Workers with Family
Responsibilities Recommendation, 1981 (No. 165) and the Maternity Protection
Recommendation, 2000 (No. 191).
162. The Committee observed that this is the first General Survey that considers together the
ILO standards on discrimination, maternity protection, and workers with family
responsibilities, as well as the first General Survey to examine Convention No. 183 and
Recommendation No. 191 on maternity protection. The Committee highlighted the key
interlinkages between the instruments examined, as well as with other relevant international
labour standards, such as the Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100), and the
Violence and Harassment Convention, 2019 (No. 190).
163. The Committee underlined the timeliness of the General Survey and underscored that
eliminating discrimination and advancing gender equality at work, is at the heart of the ILO’s
mandate to promote and realize social justice and decent work. It recalled the commitments
affirmed in the ILO Centenary Declaration for the Future of Work, 2019, towards achieving
gender equality at work through a transformative agenda and the effective realization of
gender equality in opportunities and treatment. The Global Call for Action for a human-centred
recovery from the COVID-19 crisis that is inclusive, sustainable and resilient and the resolution
concerning inequalities and the world of work, both adopted in 2021, reaffirmed and
strengthened such commitments.
The situation and needs of Member States
164. The Committee welcomed the numerous and diverse measures adopted by the tripartite
constituents in many countries towards ratification and implementation of the instruments,
including through inclusive definition of gender discrimination in the legislation, inclusive
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
national policies and strategies, social dialogue initiatives, collective agreements and
awareness-raising action.
165. The Committee nevertheless expressed its concern that, despite important advances made
over past decades, progress has stalled in certain countries, and there have even been
setbacks due to the impact and economic fallouts of the COVID-19 pandemic. It noted that, in
certain parts of the world, women continue to face significant cumulative disadvantages in the
labour market, and discrimination in employment and occupation, as well as violence and
harassment at work, remain pervasive.
166. While taking note of existing national legislative and policy frameworks to eliminate
discrimination, the Committee emphasized that measures adopted often fell short of
overcoming current challenges, such as the evolving and less visible forms of discrimination,
including indirect and intersectional discrimination. It also noted that gaps in coverage
persisted, particularly in relation to the informal economy and other specific sectors,
occupations and work arrangements that may be left out of general regulatory frameworks.
167. The Committee also expressed concern about the persistent dynamics of occupational gender
segregation. It noted that structural obstacles to employment, widespread societal
perceptions about the distribution of roles between men and women, and unequal
shouldering of family responsibilities, often lead women to work in forms of employment or in
sectors or occupations traditionally considered “female”, sometimes characterized by lowskilled work and weak labour protection, including lower pay and lack of social security. They
also tend to face more obstacles to access high-level and management positions.
168. Furthermore, the Committee recalled that maternity protection is indispensable to ensuring
the health protection and income security of pregnant and breastfeeding women. While it
expressed appreciation over measures taken by members States to improve maternity
protection, it also voiced concern about still existing persistent discriminatory practices based
on maternity, including in relation to recruitment, remuneration and termination of
employment. It also stated that access to comprehensive maternity protection, in particular
maternal medical care, health and safety protection measures, maternity leave and related
cash benefits, stands to be improved for women in many countries. The Committee considered
it necessary to progressively move from direct employer’s liability mechanisms to the
establishment of social security schemes through which maternity benefits are financed. The
Committee further encouraged Member States concerned to move to tax-contributions or
mixed financing mechanisms, taking into account the needs of sustainable enterprises, so as
to ensure better protection of workers and achieve equality of treatment.
169. The Committee welcomed the fact that measures to reconcile work with family responsibilities
were increasingly adopted in many countries. This included the provision of flexible work
arrangements and the establishment of family-related leave policies including parental and
paternity leave, as well as the explicit prohibition of discrimination based on family
responsibilities. It nevertheless stressed the urgent need to invest in quality care services, care
policies and care-relevant infrastructures, for instance childcare facilities with extended
opening hours, with a view to providing effective solutions that give workers with family
responsibilities the opportunity to fully engage and remain in employment and occupation.
170. Taking note of the constantly changing nature of the world of work, the Committee observed
that the digital and green economies afford new opportunities to bring about effective gender
equality. The Committee also observed that, besides investment in the care economy, the
transition from the informal to the formal economy and the equal access of women to digital
technologies are necessary to drive inclusive and sustainable economic growth.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
Common commitments
171. The Committee welcomed the broad commitment expressed by the tripartite constituents to
equality and non-discrimination in employment and occupation. It agreed upon the urgency
to eliminate discrimination in employment and occupation, guarantee full and effective
maternity protection and ensure the right of workers with family responsibilities to engage in
employment without being subject to discrimination and, to the extent possible, without
conflict between their employment and family responsibilities.
172. The Committee recognized that where persons belong to more than one disadvantaged group,
multiple and intersectional discrimination tends to compound and exacerbate existing
inequalities and forms of discrimination. It also recognized the subtle and less visible nature
of indirect forms of discrimination and the need to adopt new legal approaches to address
these forms of discrimination.
173. The Committee recognized that there cannot be full gender equality at work in a broader
context of pervasive inequality, and that the advancement of gender equality is a shared
responsibility. In this regard, a forward-looking and integrated approach should promote
societal change, address structural barriers and protect workers. The Committee also
emphasized that the social partners should actively contribute to promoting societal change
and that they share a responsibility to ensure that policies and measures are effectively applied
in the workplace.
174. The Committee also highlighted the essential role of social partners in the elaboration,
adoption and implementation of inclusive cross-cutting policy measures to implement the six
instruments. It recalled that social dialogue and the social partners’ active engagement are
essential to promote wide ownership of agreed measures and ensure that they are effectively
implemented, monitored, evaluated and reviewed to respond to evolving needs and realities.
The Committee also underlined the importance of women’s participation in social dialogue
institutions as an enabling factor.
ILO means of action
175. The Committee called upon ILO constituents to step up their efforts towards the elimination
of discrimination and achievement of gender equality. To that end, it highlighted the
availability of technical assistance from the Office, if need be, to strengthen the capacity of the
tripartite constituents to help them develop robust, effective, comprehensive and cross-cutting
legislative and policy frameworks to fully implement the instruments examined. These should
tackle all forms of discrimination through clear definitions and prohibitions, address gaps in
coverage, both in law and in practice, overcome structural and persistent obstacles, facilitate
women’s access to a broader range of jobs, gear societal change through awareness-raising,
and actively promote gender equality at work, maternity protection and equality for workers
with family responsibilities.
176. The Committee expected the Office to continue to conduct the necessary research on the
implementation of the instruments examined to develop further guidance which could assist
Member States and constituents, including on access to quality maternity medical care and on
the design of care leave policies and to identify possible responses to current and emerging
realities, including comprehensive and innovative approaches to address the needs of ILO
constituents. Underscoring that statistical data disaggregated by sex is crucial to implement
and enforce the instruments examined effectively, the Committee pointed to the value of ILO
technical assistance in this regard and requested the Office to continue to collect, analyse and
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
disseminate comparative statistical data on gender equality, maternity protection and workers
with family responsibilities. It also stressed the importance of ensuring, including through
technical assistance, that the relevant enforcement bodies, including labour inspections, other
persons working in the labour administration and relevant ministries, and workers’ and
employers’ organizations, are adequately equipped and have sufficient technical knowledge
and capacity.
177. The Committee invited Member States, that have not done so already, to consider the
possibility of ratifying Conventions Nos 111, 156 and 183. Member States could avail
themselves of technical assistance from the Office, should they so wish, to assess potential
obstacles to ratification and ways to overcome them.
178. The Committee encouraged the ILO to continue its efforts to promote the ratification of
Conventions Nos 111, 156 and 183 and provide ILO constituents with the necessary assistance,
in this regard. Where appropriate, ILO assistance could also be provided for the consideration
of the ratification of other ILO standards identified as relevant for achieving gender equality at
work.
179. Finally, the Committee requested the Office to take into account the General Survey on Achieving
Gender Equality at Work, the tripartite discussion that followed and the outcome of its
discussion in relevant ILO work. It hoped that the General Survey would feed into the 2024
International Labour Conference’s recurrent discussion on the strategic objective of
fundamental principles and rights at work and the general discussion on decent work and the
care economy; the work of the Standards Review Mechanism Tripartite Working Group,
particularly in relation to its examination of maternity protection standards in September 2023;
as well as the transformative policies called for in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development, particularly in SDGs 1 (No poverty), 3 (Good health and well-being), 5 (Gender
equality) and 8 (Decent work and economic growth).
* * *
Compliance with specific obligations
Cases of serious failure by Member States to respect their reporting and
other standards-related obligations
180. During a dedicated sitting, the Committee examined the cases of serious failure by Member
States to respect their reporting and other standards-related obligations. As explained in
document D.1, Part X, the following criteria are applied: failure to supply the reports due for
the past two years or more on the application of ratified Conventions; failure to supply first
reports on the application of ratified Conventions for at least two years; “Urgent appeals” –
failure to supply reports on the application of ratified Conventions for at least three years and
failure to supply first reports on the application of ratified Conventions for at least three years;
failure to supply information in reply to all or most of the comments made by the Committee
of Experts; failure to supply the reports due for the past five years on unratified Conventions
and Recommendations; failure to submit the instruments adopted for at least seven sessions
to the competent authorities; and failure during the past three years to indicate the
representative organizations of employers and workers to which, in accordance with
article 23(2) of the Constitution, copies of reports and information supplied to the Office under
articles 19 and 22 have been communicated. The Chairperson explained the working methods
of the Committee for the discussion of these cases. The procès-verbaux of this discussion is
found in section III of Part Two of this report.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
Failure to submit Conventions, Protocols and Recommendations to the competent
authorities
181. In accordance with its terms of reference, the Committee considered the manner in which
effect was given to article 19(5), (6) and (7) of the ILO Constitution. These provisions required
Member States within 12, or exceptionally 18, months of the closing of each session of the
Conference to submit the instruments adopted at that session to the authority or authorities
within whose competence the matter lies, for the enactment of legislation or other action, and
to inform the Director-General of the ILO of the measures taken to that end, with particulars
of the authority or authorities regarded as competent.
182. The Committee noted that, in order to facilitate its discussions, the report of the Committee of
Experts mentioned only the governments which had not provided any information on the
submission to the competent authorities of instruments adopted by the Conference for at least
seven sessions (from the 99th Session (2010) to the 108th Session (2019), because the
Conference did not adopt any Conventions and Recommendations during the 97th (2008),
98th (2009), 102nd (2013) 105th (2016) and 107th (2018) Sessions). This time frame was
deemed long enough to warrant inviting Government delegations to the dedicated sitting of
the Committee so that they may explain the delays in submission.
183. The Committee took note of the information and explanations provided by the Government
representatives who took the floor during the dedicated sitting. It noted the specific difficulties
mentioned by certain delegates in complying with this constitutional obligation, and in
particular the intention to submit shortly to competent authorities the instruments adopted by
the International Labour Conference. Some governments have requested the assistance of the
ILO to clarify how to proceed and to complete the process of submission to national
parliaments in consultation with the social partners.
184. The Committee recalls that compliance with the obligation to submit Conventions,
Recommendations and Protocols to competent national authorities is a requirement of the
highest importance to ensure the effectiveness of the Organization’s standards-related
activities. It also recalled that governments could request technical assistance from the Office
to overcome their difficulties in this respect.
185. The Committee noted that the following countries were still concerned with the serious failure
to submit the instruments adopted by the Conference to the competent authorities: Angola,
Belize, Plurinational State of Bolivia, Brunei Darussalam, Chad, Comoros, Congo,
Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia,
Grenada, Guinea, Haiti, Hungary, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Marshall Islands, Papua New
Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines,
Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Syrian Arab Republic, Timor-Leste, Tuvalu, United Arab
Emirates, Vanuatu, Yemen and Zambia. The Committee expressed the firm hope that
appropriate measures would be taken by the governments concerned to comply with their
constitutional obligation to submit.
Failure to supply reports and information on the application of ratified Conventions
186. The Committee took note of the information and explanations provided by the Government
representatives who took the floor during the dedicated sitting. Some governments have
requested the assistance of the ILO. The Committee recalled that the submission of reports on
the application of ratified Conventions is a fundamental constitutional obligation and the basis
of the system of supervision. It also recalled the particular importance of the submission of
first reports on the application of ratified Conventions. It stressed the importance of respecting
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
the deadlines for such submission. Furthermore, it underlined the fundamental importance of
clear and complete information in response to the comments of the Committee of Experts to
permit a continued dialogue with the governments concerned. In this respect, the Committee
recalled that the ILO could provide technical assistance to contribute to compliance in this
respect.
187. The Committee noted that, by the end of the 2022 meeting of the Committee of Experts, the
percentage of reports received (article 22 of the ILO Constitution) was 70.9 per cent (65.9 per
cent for the 2021 meeting). Since then, further reports have been received, bringing the figure
to 76.2 per cent (as compared with 74.2 per cent in June 2022).
188. The Committee noted that no reports on ratified Conventions have been supplied for the past
two years or more by the following States: Afghanistan, Antigua and Barbuda, Chad,
Comoros, Dominica, Haiti, Lebanon, Saint Lucia, Somalia, Syrian Arab Republic, Tuvalu,
Vanuatu and Yemen.
189. The Committee also noted that first reports due on ratified Conventions have not been
supplied by the following countries for at least two years: Cook Islands, Grenada, Lebanon,
Marshall Islands, North Macedonia, Sudan, Tuvalu and Vanuatu.
190. The Committee noted that no information has yet been received regarding any or most of the
observations and direct requests of the Committee of Experts to which replies were requested
for the period ending 2022 from the following countries: Afghanistan, Antigua and Barbuda,
Barbados, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo, Dominica, Grenada,
Haiti, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Malta, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Papua New Guinea,
Romania, Saint Lucia, Singapore, Somalia, South Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Tuvalu,
Uganda, Ukraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland – Falkland Islands
(Malvinas), Vanuatu and Yemen.
Urgent appeals
191. Following the decision of the Committee of Experts to institute a new practice of launching
urgent appeals for cases corresponding to countries which have failed to send, under article 22
of the Constitution, the reports due for at least three years, and failed to send first reports for
at least three years, to draw the attention of the Committee on the Application of Standards to
those cases, the Committee invited the countries concerned to provide information during the
examination of cases of serious failure to fulfil reporting obligations, and expressed the hope
that the Governments of Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, Haiti, Lebanon, Saint Lucia,
Syrian Arab Republic, Tuvalu, Vanuatu and Yemen will supply their reports due as soon as
possible.
192. The Committee brought to the attention of these governments that the Committee of Experts
could examine in substance, at its next session, the application of the Conventions concerned
on the basis of publicly available information, even if the government has not sent the
corresponding report. The Committee recalled the possibility of governments availing
themselves of the technical assistance of the Office in this regard.
Supply of reports on unratified Conventions and Recommendations
193. The Committee stressed the importance it attaches to the constitutional obligation to supply
reports on unratified Conventions and Recommendations. These reports permit a better
evaluation of the situation in the context of the General Surveys of the Committee of Experts.
In this respect, the Committee expressed the firm hope that the governments concerned will
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
comply with their obligation to supply these reports and recalled that the ILO can provide
technical assistance to contribute to compliance in this respect.
194. The Committee noted that over the past five years none of the reports on unratified
Conventions and Recommendations, requested under article 19 of the Constitution, have been
supplied by: Albania, Barbados, Chad, Djibouti, Dominica, Haiti, Liberia, Marshall Islands,
Papua New Guinea, Saint Lucia, Sao Tome and Principe, Timor Leste, Tuvalu, Uganda and
Yemen.
Communication of copies of reports to employers’ and workers’ organizations
195. The Committee welcomes the fact that no Member State has failed to indicate during the past
three years the names of the representative organizations of employers and workers to which,
in accordance with article 23(2) of the Constitution, copies of reports and information supplied
to the ILO under articles 19 and 22 have been communicated. The Committee pointed out that
the fulfilment by governments of their obligation to communicate reports and information to
the organizations of employers and workers was a vital prerequisite for ensuring the
participation of those organizations in the ILO supervisory system. The Committee expresses
the firm hope that this is a sign of genuine tripartite social dialogue in all ILO Member States.
The Committee encourages Member States to continue in that direction.
Application of ratified Conventions
196. The Committee noted with interest the information provided by the Committee of Experts in
paragraph 122 of its report, which lists new cases in which that Committee has expressed its
satisfaction at the measures taken by governments following comments it had made as to the
degree of conformity of national legislation or practice with the provisions of a ratified
Convention. In addition, the Committee of Experts has listed in paragraph 125 of its report
cases in which measures ensuring better application of ratified Conventions have been noted
with interest. These results are tangible proof of the effectiveness of the supervisory system.
197. At its present session, the Committee examined 24 individual cases relating to the application
of various Conventions. 6
Specific cases
198. The Committee considered that it should draw the attention of the Conference to the
discussion it held regarding the case of the application of Convention No. 111 by Afghanistan.
The full record of this discussion and the Committee’s conclusions appear in Part Two of this
report. The Committee’s conclusions are also reproduced below.
Participation in the work of the Committee
199. The Committee wished to express its appreciation to the 24 Governments which collaborated
by providing information on the situation in their countries and participating in the discussion
of the individual cases concerning their country.
200. The Committee nevertheless regretted that the Governments of the following States failed to
take part in the discussions concerning the fulfilment of their reporting and other standardsrelated obligations: Afghanistan, Albania, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Belize,
A summary of the information submitted by governments, the discussion and conclusions of the examination of the
individual cases are contained in section C of Part Two of this report.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
Burundi, Chad, Comoros, Congo, Cook Islands, Democratic Republic of the Congo,
Djibouti, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea, Haiti, Hungary,
Iraq, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Malta, Marshall Islands, North Macedonia, Papua New
Guinea, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the
Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Sudan,
Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Timor-Leste, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab
Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland – Falkland Islands
(Malvinas), and Vanuatu.
201. Overall, the Committee expresses regret at the large number of cases of serious failure by
Member States to respect their reporting and other standards-related obligations. The
Committee observes that some governments have provided written information after the
session dedicated to examining this question. While acknowledging the efforts made in this
regard, the Committee trusts that in the future governments will act swiftly to enable it to carry
out this examination in full knowledge of the facts. The Committee recalls that governments
may request technical assistance from the Office to overcome their difficulties in this regard.
Conclusions adopted following the examination of the individual cases
202. During the informal tripartite consultations on the working methods of the Committee in
April 2023, it was decided to present the conclusions adopted following the examination of the
individual cases in Part One of the report. The conclusions adopted this year are presented
below.
Lebanon (ratification: 1977)
Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29)
The Committee took note of the written and oral information provided by the
Government and the discussion that followed.
While noting the prevailing situation in the country, the Committee deeply
regretted the failure of the Government to respect its reporting obligations despite an
urgent appeal by the Committee of Experts.
The Committee expressed deep concern at the lack of adequate protection for
migrant domestic workers in law and practice and noted the lack of rapid, efficient and
effective complaints mechanisms for migrant domestic workers.
Taking into account the discussion, the Committee urges the Government to take
effective and time-bound measures to:
• provide migrant domestic workers with adequate legal protection, including by
ensuring the reinstatement and effective implementation of the revised Standard
Unified Contract and the adoption of the Bill regulating the working conditions of
domestic workers, and provide information to the Committee of Experts on the
measures taken in this regard, and on the results achieved;
• ensure that migrant domestic workers who are victims of abusive practices and
working conditions amounting to forced labour have access to justice – including
adequate protection, assistance and remedies – in the event of a violation of their
rights;
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
• ensure that migrant domestic workers are protected against any measures of
retaliation or deportation, and that their cases are processed expeditiously and that
decisions are enforced;
• introduce and enforce effective and sufficiently dissuasive penalties to employers and
labour recruiters who engage migrant workers in situations amounting to forced
labour;
• strengthen the capacity of law enforcement bodies in this area and provide
information to the Committee of Experts on the measures taken in this regard, and on
the results achieved;
• abolish the Kafala system and replace it with a work permit system that allows
domestic migrant workers to change employer and provide information to the
Committee of Experts on any legislative changes adopted or envisaged to review the
Kafala system;
• hire and train additional labour inspectors and increase material resources to them
necessary to carry out labour inspections in the domestic work sector and provide
details to the Committee of Experts on the training received by labour inspectors, the
number of inspections in the domestic work sector, the number of offences detected,
and the penalties imposed;
• provide a copy of the bilateral Agreement signed with the Government of Ethiopia, as
well as any other relevant legislative measures mentioned in its written information;
• provide information to the Committee of Experts on the number of investigations,
prosecutions, convictions and penalties imposed for the offence of engaging migrant
domestic workers in situations of forced labour; and
• provide any outstanding information requested by the Committee of Experts before
its next session together with detailed information on the measures taken to
implement these recommendations, and on the results achieved.
The Committee urges the Government to avail itself, without delay, of ILO technical
assistance to ensure full compliance with its obligations under the Convention in law and
practice.
The Committee also requests the Government to accept a direct contacts mission.
The Committee requests the Government to fully comply with its reporting
obligations and to provide, in consultation with the social partners, a report to the
Committee of Experts by 1 September 2023 on measures taken and progress achieved on
the application of the Convention in law and practice.
Nigeria (ratification: 2002)
Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182)
The Committee took note of the oral and written information provided by the
Government and the discussion that followed.
While acknowledging the complexity of the situation prevailing on the ground and
the presence of armed groups in the country, the Committee deeply deplored the current
situation where children are being forcibly recruited by armed groups for use in armed
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
conflict, which also results in other serious violations of children’s rights, such as
abductions, murder and sexual violence.
The Committee noted with deep concern the situation of children, in particular girls,
children in war-affected areas and street/Almajiri children, who continue to be deprived
of basic education.
The Committee also expressed concern at the persistence of child trafficking,
particularly of girls for the purpose of domestic servitude and sexual exploitation and
boys for the purpose of child begging.
Taking into account the discussion of the case, the Committee urges the
Government of Nigeria to take effective and time-bound measures to:
• ensure the full and immediate demobilization of all children and to put a stop, in law
and practice, to the forced recruitment or use of children into armed groups;
• ensure that thorough investigations and prosecutions of all persons who forcibly
recruit children for use in armed conflict are carried out and sufficiently effective and
dissuasive penalties are imposed in law and practice;
• improve the functioning of the education system to facilitate access to free quality
basic education for all children, particularly girls and street children, and security and
safety of children in war-affected areas, and to take measures to increase the school
enrolment and attendance rates at the primary and secondary levels and to decrease
the school drop-out rates, and provide information to the Committee of Experts on the
measures taken in this regard, and on the results achieved.
• provide for the rehabilitation and social integration of street children and children
who are forced to join armed groups, and provide information to the Committee of
Experts on the measures taken in this regard, including by the Almajiri Special
Education Project, and on the results achieved.
• combat child trafficking by ensuring that the perpetrators of these acts are identified
and prosecuted, and that sufficiently effective and dissuasive sanctions are imposed
in law and practice, and provide information to the Committee of Experts on the
measures taken in this regard, including by the National Agency for the Prohibition of
Trafficking in Persons, and on the results achieved.
The Committee requests the Government to continue to avail itself of ongoing ILO
technical assistance to give full implementation to the above-mentioned measures and
progress towards the full eradication of the worst forms of child labour in accordance
with the Convention.
The Committee also requests the Government to submit a report to the Committee
of Experts by 1 September 2023 with the relevant information, in consultation with the
social partners.
Nicaragua (ratification: 1967)
Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87)
The Committee took note of the written and oral information provided by the
Government and the discussion that followed.?
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
The Committee noted with deep concern the persistent climate of intimidation and
harassment of independent workers’ and employers’ organizations.
The Committee noted with deep concern the allegations of the arrest and detention
of employer leaders and the further deterioration of the situation.
The Committee also noted with deep concern the absence of any progress and
cooperation on the part of the Government since last year.
Taking into account the discussion, the Committee urges the Government to:
• ensure that workers and employers can establish their own organizations and operate
without interference, including Managing Board of Private Enterprises (COSEP);
• immediately cease all acts of violence, threats, persecution, stigmatization,
intimidation or any other form of aggression against individuals or organizations in
connection with both the exercise of legitimate trade union activities and the activities
of employers’ organizations, including COSEP, and adopt measures to ensure that such
acts are not repeated including the return of the Nicaraguan nationality of those who
have been deprived of it for this reason;
• immediately release any employer or trade union member who may be imprisoned in
connection with the exercise of the legitimate activities of their organizations and
provide information on all the measures taken in that regard;
• promote social dialogue without further delay through the establishment of a
tripartite dialogue round table under the auspices of the ILO, that is presided over by
an independent chairperson who has the trust of all sectors, that duly respects the
representativeness of employers’ and workers’ organizations in its composition and
that meets periodically, as recommended by the Committee in 2022; and
• repeal Law No. 1040 on the regulation of foreign agents, the Special Law on
Cybercrimes, and Law No. 1055 on the Defence of the Rights of the People to
Independence, Sovereignty and Self-determination for Peace, which limit the exercise
of freedom of association and freedom of expression.
The Committee urges the Government to avail itself of ILO technical assistance to
ensure full compliance with its obligations under the Convention in law and in practice.
Nicaragua (ratification: 1967)
Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111)
The Committee took note of the written and oral information provided by the
Government and the discussion that followed.?
The Committee noted with deep concern the climate of violence, insecurity and
intimidation in the country, which is propitious for acts of discrimination in employment
and occupation based on political opinion.
It also noted the arbitrary detentions and the continuing reports of human rights
violations and abuses, including gender-based discrimination.
Taking into account the discussion, the Committee urges the Government, in
consultation with the social partners, to:
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
• take immediate measures to end the climate of violence, insecurity and intimidation
in the country;
• adopt the necessary measures to eliminate discrimination in employment and
occupation and provide adequate protection for workers in the event of discrimination
on the basis of political opinion;
• refrain from discrimination on political grounds, ensure that no penalties are imposed
and provide adequate protection in the event of discrimination on the basis of political
opinion;
• provide adequate remedies including the restoration of citizenship and the return of
seized assets to those who have been discriminated against on the grounds of political
opinion;
• provide information on any additional measure taken to eliminate discrimination on
political grounds and on the outcome of any investigation conducted into complaints
made to the administrative or judicial authorities for acts of discrimination on the
basis of political opinion;
• indicate the extent to which the provision of the Labour Code (section 17(p)) also
covers the “hostile work environment”; and
• provide details of any administrative complaint or legal action filed with the labour or
criminal courts under the provisions of the Labour Code or Criminal Code in respect of
sexual and quid pro quo harassment; as well as of the penalties imposed where
complaints submitted to the Ministry of Labour are upheld and identified as acts of
sexual harassment.
The Committee also requests the Government to continue to:
• take all measures to ensure in practice the elimination of violence and harassment in
the world of work and to provide information to the Committee of Experts on all
measures adopted regarding sexual harassment, including awareness-raising and
prevention;
• take specific measures in practice to protect indigenous and Afro-descendant peoples
against racial discrimination in employment and occupation and provide information
on all measures adopted or envisaged to protect indigenous and Afro-descendent
peoples against racial discrimination in employment and occupation;
• provide information on the outcomes of the many actions taken relating to the
national policy of equality of opportunity and treatment; and
• provide information on the type of violations identified relating to the application of
the Convention, the corrective measures introduced and the penalties imposed.
The Committee reminds the Government that it can avail itself of ILO technical
assistance if needed.
The Committee requests the Government to report, in consultation with the social
partners, on the progress achieved in the implementation of the Convention before
1 September 2023.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
Afghanistan (ratification: 1969)
Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111)
The Committee noted with deep concern the repeated failure of the Government to
respond to the Committee’s comments since 2019.
The Committee expressed its very deep concern at the significant deterioration of
the situation of women and girls, including the situation of vulnerable groups of women,
and other minorities since 2021.
The Committee deeply deplored the discriminatory prohibitions, bans and
restrictions based on sex imposed on girls and women since 2021, which adversely impact
on their ability to enjoy fundamental human rights and freedoms. The Committee also
deplored the lack of legal framework explicitly defining and prohibiting direct and
indirect discrimination based on at least all the grounds set out in the Convention, in all
aspects of employment and occupation, as well as the lack of access to nondiscriminatory formal justice mechanisms and effective remedies, in line with the
Convention.
Taking into account the discussion, the Committee urges that, in consultation with
the social partners, effective and time-bound measures be taken to:
• remove without delay all bans, discriminatory practices and unequal treatment based
on sex imposed on girls and women to prohibit, limit or impede their access to
secondary and higher education, vocational training, employment and all types of
occupations in all sectors, and provide information to the Committee of Experts on the
measures taken in this regard, and on the results achieved;
• put in place the necessary laws, policies and implementation strategy to prevent and
address violence and harassment against girls and women, and provide information
to the Committee of Experts on the measures taken in this regard, and on the results
achieved;
• amend section 9 of the Labour law in order to explicitly define and prohibit in law
direct and indirect discrimination in line with the Convention;
• ensure access to non-discriminatory formal judicial mechanisms and effective
remedies;
• organize activities and implement a campaign to raise public awareness of the
principles of non-discrimination and equality protected under the Convention;
• provide information on the adoption of all the above-mentioned measures on any
progress made in that regard, as well as the results achieved on the equal participation
of women in employment and occupation, including by providing statistical
information, disaggregated by sex and occupation, on the participation of girls and
women in education, vocational training and employment; and
• develop a multidisciplinary and multi sectoral action plan to combat discrimination in
employment, occupation and education, with ILO technical assistance and in close
cooperation with the social partners and other relevant civil society organizations. In
addition, coordinate with other UN agencies operating in the territory.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
The Committee also calls for specific action to be taken in order to facilitate access
to education and vocational training and promote employment opportunities of persons
with disabilities, in particular girls and women.
The Committee decided to include its conclusions in a special paragraph of its report.
Cambodia (ratification: 1999)
Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105)
The Committee took note of the written and oral information provided by the
Government and the discussion that followed.
The Committee deeply deplored the continued use of the provisions of the national
legislation, including the Penal Code, to prosecute and convict persons who express their
political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or
economic system, or to punish those who participate in strikes, leading to penalties of
imprisonment involving compulsory prison labour.
The Committee expressed deep concern at the arrest and imprisonment of trade
unionists and others for exercising their civil liberties and expressing different political
views from that of the Government.
Taking into account the discussion, the Committee urges the Government to take
effective and time-bound measures to:
• ensure that the right to hold or express political views or views ideologically opposed
to the established political, social or economic system without the threat of penalties
involving compulsory labour is fully respected;
• ensure that that the application of legislative provisions do not contravene Article 1 of
the Convention by the imposition of sanctions involving compulsory labour;
• repeal or amend relevant provisions of the Penal Code and the Act on Political Parties
providing for and leading to penalties of compulsory labour, in consultation with the
social partners, in order to bring them into conformity with the Convention;
• immediately and unconditionally release, quash convictions and drop all charges
brought against individuals for having expressed political views or views ideologically
opposed to the established political, social or economic system, who were punished
for having participated in strikes;
• ensure access to effective judicial remedies for victims of compulsory labour in
violation of the Convention;
• implement the recommendations related to the matters under the Convention made
by the direct contacts mission that took place in March–April 2022 under Convention
No. 87; and
• develop an action plan, in consultation with the social partners, to implement these
recommendations without delay.
The Committee requests the Government to provide any relevant information
requested by the Committee of Experts before 1 September 2023 together with detailed
information on the measures taken to implement these recommendations.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
The Committee invites the Government to avail itself of ILO technical assistance to
effectively implement all of the Committee’s recommendations.
Indonesia (ratification: 1957)
Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98)
The Committee took note of the written and oral information provided by the
Government and the discussion that followed.
The Committee noted with deep concern the significant gaps in law and practice
regarding the protection against anti-union discrimination, the scope of collective
bargaining permitted under the law, promotion of collective bargaining and interference
in free and voluntary collective bargaining with respect to the Convention.
Taking into account the discussion, the Committee urges the Government, in
consultation with the social partners, to take effective and time-bound measures to:
• review the Law on Job Creation in consultation with social partners and adopt without
delay the amendments necessary to bring that law into compliance with the
Convention;
• ensure in law and practice that there is no interference of employers or government
officials in a voting procedure of trade unions in accordance with Article 2 of the
Convention;
• ensure that unilateral recourse to compulsory arbitration as a way to avoid free and
voluntary collective bargaining is employed only in very limited circumstances and
ensure its use does not impede the right of trade unions to freely organize their
activities;
• promote collective bargaining, and provide information to the Committee of Experts
on the measures taken in this regard as well as on the results achieved, including the
number of collective agreements specifying the sectors of activity concerned;
• ensure that the rights under the Convention are guaranteed for workers in all the
zones, equivalent to Export Processing Zones, where export products are produced,
and provide information to the Committee of Experts on the trends and number of
collective agreements in force in these zones;
• prevent any act of violence and ensure, in law and practice, adequate protection of
individuals for their legitimate exercise of their rights under the Convention, including
through effective and expeditious access to justice, adequate compensation as well as
the imposition of effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions;
• provide to the Committee of Experts statistics on the number of complaints of antiunion discrimination and interference filed, the number of complaints brought before
the courts, as well as any remedies and sanctions imposed and the average duration
of proceedings under each category; and
• take decisive and effective measures to promote a climate of non-violence, as well as
constructive social dialogue and labour relations at all levels.
The Committee requests the Government to avail itself, without delay, of ILO
technical assistance with a particular focus on legislative labour law reform, including
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
the Job Creation Law, with the full involvement of social partners, to ensure full
compliance with its obligations under the Convention in law and practice.
The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed and complete
information on measures taken and progress made on the recommendations to the
Committee of Experts made before its next meeting.
Italy
Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) (ratification: 1952)
Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129) (ratification: 1981)
The Committee took note of the written and oral information provided by the
Government and the discussion that followed.
The Committee noted with concern several issues regarding compliance with the
Conventions, in essence related to labour inspection with respect to employment of
migrant workers in an irregular situation.
Taking into account the discussion, the Committee urges the Government, in
consultation with the social partners, to:
• improve the collection of disaggregated labour inspection data, including by
establishing an integrated database in coordination with the different agencies and
bodies performing labour inspection duties;
• consider the establishment of a tripartite consultative mechanism in line with the ILO
Guidelines on General Principles of Labour Inspection to ensure the effective design,
adoption and review of inspection policies, strategies, programmes and plans,
including the strengthening of gender responsive enforcement measures related to
ascertainment warnings and the collection of unpaid wages and contributions;
• consider the establishment of a wages and contributions protection fund in
consultation with the social partners to assure the payment of unpaid wages and
contributions;
• extend the collection of statistical data regarding cases of failure to comply with
contractual obligations to workers in an irregular situation, to ensure recovery of the
credits for these workers, notably unpaid wages and social security contributions;
• provide the Labour Inspectorate with the necessary resources for effective labour
inspection.
The Committee also requests the Government to continue to provide information
• the number of migrant workers in an irregular situation detected by labour inspectors;
• the role of labour inspectors in informing migrant workers about their labour rights
and in enforcing those rights; and
• the number of “special case” residence permits granted and a result of cooperation by
those individuals with inspection services.
The Committee invites the Government to avail itself of ILO technical assistance to
effectively implement all of the Committee’s recommendations.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
The Committee requests the Government to submit a report to the Committee of
Experts by 1 September 2023, on measures taken and progress achieved towards full
compliance with the Convention.
Liberia (ratification: 1962)
Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87)
The Committee took note of the written and oral information provided by the
Government and the discussion that followed.
The Committee noted the long-standing nature and the prior discussion of this case
in the Committee, most recently in 2022.
The Committee regretted that the Government had not implemented its previous
recommendations.
Taking into account the discussion of the case, the Committee requests the
Government to take urgent steps, in full consultation with the social partners, to bring
its law and practice in line with Convention No. 87 and in particular to:
• ensure that all workers are able to exercise their labour rights under the Convention
in an environment of respect for civil liberties, including the right to freedom of
association, freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and protest without
interference and fear for their personal safety and physical integrity;
• ensure that trade union leaders and members are not jailed for engaging in trade
union activities and that threats against trade union leaders for their trade union
activities are fully investigated and the perpetrators duly punished;
• put in place measures, including effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions, to
ensure that trade unions can only be dissolved following due process and by a judicial
authority only as a last resort;
• register the National Health Workers’ Union of Liberia (NAHWUL) as a trade union
organization without further delay and provide additional information to the
Committee of Experts on any pending allegations;
• review the Decent Work Act and any other related legislation to ensure that all
workers are able to exercise the right to form or join a trade union of their choice and
in particular, ensure that public sector workers and civil servants enjoy the rights and
guarantees set out in the Convention;
• ensure that the rights enshrined in the Convention are afforded to maritime workers,
including trainees, and that any laws or regulations adopted or envisaged cover this
category of workers; and
• ensure that foreign workers are entitled to form and join unions of their own choosing
in line with the Convention.
The Committee urges the Government to provide information to the Committee of
Experts, by 1 September 2023 on all the measures taken to implement these
recommendations and to comply with its obligations under the Convention and on any
developments in this regard.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
The Committee calls on the Government to continue to avail itself of ILO technical
assistance and to accept a direct contacts mission.
North Macedonia (ratification: 1991)
Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98)
The Committee took note of oral information provided by the Government and the
discussion that followed.
The Committee noted with concern the multiple acts of anti-union discrimination
reported in the country.
Taking into account the discussion, the Committee urges the Government, in
consultation with the social partners, to take effective and time-bound measures to:
• ensure that workers enjoy their rights under the Convention and are protected against
acts of anti-union discrimination;
• ensure that workers’ and employers’ organizations enjoy adequate protection against
any external acts
administration;
interference
their
establishment,
functioning
• ensure that existing and prospective legislation is in conformity with the Convention;
respect the collective agreements reached between social partners, in both the private
and public sectors, and take appropriate measures to implement their results;
• ensure the proper functioning of the Commission for representativeness so that the
procedures for recognizing the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Macedonia (KSS)
in the public sector are activated as soon as possible in accordance with national
legislation. This is in order to ensure the full participation of the KSS in social dialogue
and to guarantee the right of its members to organize collectively;
• communicate to the Committee of Experts the factors that have led to the increase in
the rate of coverage by collective bargaining, as well as information on the provisions
regulating the relationship between general and specific collective agreements in
private and public sectors;
• continue to provide the Committee of Experts with information on the application of
the Convention in practice, including statistical data on the number of collective
agreements concluded in public and private sectors and the number of workers
covered.
The Committee invites the Government to avail itself of ILO technical assistance to
ensure full compliance with its obligations under the Convention in law and practice.
The Committee invites the Government to accept a direct contacts mission in order
to best support the Government and social partners to implement these
recommendations.
Madagascar (ratification: 1960)
Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87)
The Committee took note of the oral information provided by the Government and
the discussion that followed.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
The Committee noted with concern the long-standing issues relating to the
restrictions on trade union activities in the maritime sector, the absence of any elections
for staff representatives since 2015 and the use of compulsory arbitration.
The Committee expressed its deep concern regarding the imprisonment of
Mr Zotiakobanjinina Fanja Marcel Sento and noted the Government information
regarding his release by Presidential decree.
Taking into account the discussion of the case, the Committee urges the
Government to:
• take all necessary steps in order to ensure that the new maritime code guarantees to
seafarers the right to freely establish and join the organizations of their own choosing
without previous authorization;
• organize as soon as possible the elections for the designation of workers’
representatives;
• refrain from intervening in the activities of workers’ and employers’ organizations,
including in the designation process of their representatives in the various social
dialogue bodies;
• ensure that unilateral recourse to compulsory arbitration as a way to avoid free and
voluntary collective bargaining is employed only in very limited circumstances and
take the necessary measures to amend sections 220, 225 and 228 of the Labour Code
to bring them in conformity with the Convention;
• immediately and unconditionally quash the conviction of Mr Zotiakobanjinina Fanja
Marcel Sento;
• refrain from using the criminal law to target trade unionists;
• amend all provisions of the criminal code hindering the right to freedom of association
of workers and employers; and
• provide a copy of the Maritime Code once adopted and detailed information to the
Committee of Experts before 1 September 2023 on the outcome of any meeting
concerning allegations of anti-union acts in the maritime sector, on any developments
on the adoption of the Maritime Code and on the factors that have prevented the
holding of elections for staff representatives since 2015.
The Committee requests the Government to avail itself of ILO technical assistance.
Gabon (ratification: 2014)
Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, as amended (MLC, 2006)
The Committee took note of the written and oral information provided by the
Government and the discussion that followed.
The Committee emphasized the need for effective national implementation of the
Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, as amended (MLC, 2006), and the need to ensure that
the Government meets its regular reporting obligations on time.
Taking into account the discussion, the Committee requests the Government to:
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
• take all necessary measures to ensure compliance in law and practice with the
Convention in consultation with the social partners;
• provide full information to the Committee of Experts regarding the application in law
and in practice of the Convention, including:
a copy of any legislative texts or other regulatory instruments once adopted;
(ii) updated statistics on the number of seafarers who are nationals or residents of
Gabon or who work on ships that fly the Gabonese flag.
The Committee urges the Government to provide the information indicated before
1 September 2023.
The Committee further requests the Government to avail itself of ILO technical
assistance for the implementation of the above-mentioned recommendations
Philippines (ratification: 1953)
Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87)
The Committee took note of the written and oral information provided by the
Government and the discussion that followed.
The Committee noted the long-standing nature and the prior discussion of this case
in the Committee, most recently in 2019.
The Committee noted with deep concern the numerous allegations of murders of
trade unionists and anti-union violence, allegations of serious and systemic violations of
the right to freedom of association as well as of lack of investigation in relation to these
allegations.
The Committee noted the concerns raised by the social partners regarding the
failure of the Government to submit a joint implementation report with them as
recommended by the High-Level Tripartite Mission that took place on 23–26 January
2023.
The Committee noted that the Government has taken some steps to implement the
recommendations set out in the report of the High-Level Tripartite Mission but regretted
that many recommendations remain unaddressed.
Taking into account the discussion, the Committee urges the Government, in
consultation with the social partners, to:
• put an immediate end to any act of violence and intimidation against union members
for the legitimate exercise of their rights under the Convention as well as violations of
freedom of association, in line with the recommendations of the ILO High-Level
Tripartite Mission;
• immediately and effectively undertake investigations into the allegations of violence
in relation to members of workers’ organizations with a view to establishing the facts,
determining culpability and punishing the perpetrators;
• operationalize the monitoring bodies, including by providing adequate resources, and
provide regular information on these mechanisms and on progress on the cases
assigned to them; and
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
• ensure that all workers without distinction are able to form and join organizations of
their choosing in accordance with Article 2 of the Convention.
The Committee urges the Government to take decisive and effective measures to
promote a climate of non-violence, as well as constructive social dialogue and labour
relations at all levels in the country.
The Committee requests the Government to finalize, with ILO technical assistance
and in consultation with the social partners, the road map on effectively addressing all
outstanding issues and transmit a report on progress made to the Committee of Experts
by 1 September 2023.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (ratification: 1949)
Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87)
The Committee took note of the oral and written information provided by the
Government and the discussion that followed.
The Committee noted the centrality of social dialogue to freedom of association and
thus to the meaningful application of the Convention.
Taking into account the discussion of the case, the Committee requests the
Government to provide information to and facilitate the dialogue between and with the
social partners with a view to:
• report on the results of the 2015 Undercover Policing Inquiry and the 2018 Trades
Union Confederation (TUC) allegations regarding surveillance of trade unions and
trade unionists;
• ensure that existing and prospective legislation is in conformity with the Convention;
• limit and define the investigatory powers of the Certification Officer to ensure that
these powers do not interfere with the autonomy and functioning of workers’ and
employer’s organizations;
• facilitate electronic balloting (e-balloting); and
• improve consultation of the social partners on legislation of relevance to them.
The Committee invites the Government to avail itself of the technical assistance of
the ILO and requests the Government to provide information on progress made on all
the above issues by 1 September 2023 to the Committee of Experts.
Turkmenistan (ratification: 1997)
Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105)
The Committee took note of the oral and written information provided by the
Government and the discussion that followed.
While taking due note of the Government’s explanations regarding collaboration
with the ILO to address the issue of forced labour in cotton harvesting, the Committee
deplored the persistence of the widespread use of forced labour in relation to the annual
state-sponsored cotton harvest in Turkmenistan and the Government’s failure to make
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
any meaningful progress on the matter since the Committee discussed the case in 2016
and 2021.
Taking into account the discussion, the Committee urges the Government, in
consultation and cooperation with the social partners, to:
• ensure the full implementation of the Committee’s recommendations of 2021 and of
the road map for cooperation between the ILO and the Government;
• reinforce its efforts to ensure the complete elimination of the use of compulsory
labour of public and private sector workers, as well as students, in state-sponsored
cotton production by developing, in consultation with the social partners and in the
context of the ongoing ILO assistance, an action plan aimed at eliminating, in law and
practice, forced labour in connection with state-sponsored cotton harvesting, and
improving recruitment and working conditions in the cotton sector in line with
international labour standards;
• eliminate the compulsory quota system for production and harvesting of cotton and
ensure that no one is threatened with punishment for the lack of fulfilment of
production quotas in line with the Convention;
• issue clear instructions on the prohibition of the use of forced labour and strengthen
labour inspection and law enforcement;
• prosecute and sanction appropriately any public official who participates in the forced
mobilization of workers for the cultivation or harvest of cotton;
• ensure that, in line with the Convention, the State of Emergency Act, the Emergency
Response Act, the Act on preparation for and carrying out of mobilization in
Turkmenistan and article 19 of the Labour Code are not used as a legal basis or pretext
for forced labour;
• promote social dialogue in cotton production and continue engaging in cooperation
with the ILO and relevant organisations of workers and employers to ensure the full
application of the Convention in practice, including within the framework of the road
map and to monitor and document any incidences of forced labour in cotton harvest
without fear of reprisals.
The Committee requests the Government to provide a report containing
information on concrete measures taken, including on the activities indicated in the road
map, and respective progress made, to the Committee of Experts by 1 September 2023.
Armenia (ratification: 1994)
Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122)
The Committee took note of the written and oral information provided by the
Government and the discussion that followed.
The Committee noted the steps taken by the Government to reduce informality and
promote employment among women and young persons, persons with disabilities and
other marginalized groups.
The Committee also noted that further steps need to be undertaken, in consultation
with social partners, in these areas as well as on vocational education and training and
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
activities of private employment agencies to ensure the implementation of the
Convention both in law and in practice.
Taking into account the discussion, the Committee requests the Government in
consultation with social partners, to:
• continue to develop an employment policy to address both in law and practice the
remaining issues, notably the existing barriers to employment for disadvantaged
groups, including women, young persons, persons with disabilities and persons
vulnerable to intersectional discrimination;
• take steps to improve the employability of young persons, notably through vocational
education and training programmes;
• take steps towards establishing control mechanisms under the national legislation to
monitor the activities of private employment agencies, including considering the
possibility of ratifying the Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181);
• ensure cooperation with the social partners on existing labour market issues, annual
employment programmes as well as on their implementation and provide concrete
examples of the manner in which social partners are included in the development,
implementation and review of employment policies and programmes and their views
duly considered.
The Committee requests the Government to provide the Committee of experts with
detailed updated information by 1 September 2023 on:
• measures taken to promote full productive employment, including those adopted in
the framework of the Decent Work Country Programme (DWCP) 2019–23;
• the development and adoption of the National Employment Strategy (NES) and to
provide a copy once adopted;
• statistical data disaggregated by sex and age, on employment trends in the country,
particularly on employment, unemployment and underemployment;
• statistical data disaggregated by sex, age and region, on the nature, scope and impact
of the measures and programmes implemented to promote the employment of groups
vulnerable to decent work deficits, including women, young persons, persons with
disabilities and persons vulnerable to intersectional discrimination;
• the impact of the measures taken to reduce the number of undeclared workers and
facilitate their integration into the formal economy.
Netherlands – Sint Maarten
Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87)
The Committee took note of the oral and written information provided by the
Government and the discussion that followed.
The Committee expressed with deep concern that the Government had not
implemented the previous recommendations of the Committee.
Taking into account the discussion, the Committee urges the Government, in
consultation with the social partners, to:
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
• fully implement all pending recommendations of the Committee;
• refrain from any undue interference with the right to freedom of association of
employers’ and workers’ organizations, including any interference through the
promotion of organizations that are not freely established or chosen by workers and
employers, and ensure that this right is fully guaranteed both in law and in practice;
• ensure in law and practice the ability of workers’ and employers’ organizations to
establish higher-level organizations in full freedom, including for the purpose of
participation in the Socio-Economic Council (SER);
• ensure that workers’ and employers’ representatives on the SER are appointed by
autonomous organizations freely established by workers and employers and convene
the SER without delay;
• engage in a dialogue with autonomous organizations freely established by workers
and employers on all matters affecting their interests or of their members; and
• ensure that public sector workers are able to fully exercise the rights and guarantees
protected under the Convention in law and practice.
The Committee once again encourages the Government to request technical
assistance from the ILO, with a view to bringing national law and practice fully in
conformity with the Convention.
The Committee requests the Government to provide a report containing
information on all measures taken and progress achieved to the Committee of Experts
before 1 September 2023.
Cameroon (ratification: 1970)
Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122)
The Committee noted the written and oral information provided by the
Government.
The Committee took note of the Government’s efforts to support the transition of
workers from the informal economy to the formal economy and of the strategies put in
place to foster development and boost education and training.
The Committee regretted that the Government took no steps since 2017 to adopt
and implement a comprehensive national employment policy as required by the
Convention.
Taking note of the discussion that followed, the Committee urges the Government,
in full consultation with the social partners, to:
• scale up efforts to ensure that the national employment policy is adopted, without
further delay;
• guarantee participation of social partners and other stakeholders in the development
and implementation of future iterations of the national employment policy;
• take measures to facilitate the transition of workers from the informal to the formal
sector and provide adequate protection to all workers;
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
• promote access to employment for women and youth to reduce unemployment for
these categories and to promote their long-term integration into the labour market;
• ensure that education, training and skills policies are harmonized with employment
policies and facilitate the free choice of employment; and
• ensure the regular collection of information and statistical data so as to allow the
Government to monitor progress and evaluate policies’ implementation.
The Committee invites the Government to avail itself of the technical assistance
provided by the ILO.
The Committee further requests the Government to provide a report on the
progress made regarding the above issues as well as a copy of the national policy once
adopted, before 1 September 2023.
Costa Rica (ratification: 1966)
Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122)
The Committee took note of the written and oral information provided by the
Government and the discussion that followed.?
The Committee regretted that the Government had failed to establish and
implement a comprehensive national policy designed to promote full, productive and
freely chosen employment in full consultation with the social partners.
Taking into account the discussion, the Committee requests the Government, in
consultation with the social partners, to:
• adopt a comprehensive national employment policy to promote the creation of full,
productive and freely chosen employment opportunities in line with the Convention;
• intensify efforts to strengthen social dialogue and include the social partners on the
initiatives already developed as well as those that may be implemented in the future,
notably on employment policies and programmes, incorporation of young people in
the labour market as well as promotion of gender equality and equal opportunities in
access to employment;
• provide information on the impact of the measures adopted to achieve the objectives
of the Convention, including those adopted under the National Strategy for
Employment and Productive Development (ENDEP) and the Bicentennial National
Development and Public Investment Plan (PNDIP) 2019–22;
• take measures to ensure that the Act on strengthening public finances fully complies
with the Convention and does not infringe on fundamental principles and rights at
work;
• indicate the manner in which representatives of workers’ and employers’
organizations have been consulted, as well as representatives of the parties involved
in the design, development, implementation, monitoring and revision of the active
labour market measures adopted, including the Act on strengthening public finances;
• ensure tripartite consultation on the development of employment policies and
programmes by creating a national tripartite council.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
The Committee requests the Government to provide the Committee of Experts with
full and complete information on the above issues before 1 September 2023.
Guatemala (ratification: 1952)
Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87)
The Committee took note of the oral and written information provided by the
Government and the discussion that followed.
The Committee noted with deep concern the persistence of allegations of murders
of trade unionists and other acts of anti-union violence as well as the general situation
of impunity that prevails in the country.
Taking into account the discussion, the Committee urges the Government, in
consultation with the social partners, to:
• take immediate measures to address the general situation of violence and
intimidation, put an end to acts of violence and threat thereof against trade union
leaders and members;
• fully implement the road map adopted on 17 October 2013 without further delay as
well as any recommendations prepared by the ILO;
• investigate without delay all acts and threats of violence against trade union leaders
and members to determine responsibilities, punish the perpetrators and identify the
root causes of violence;
• provide rapid and effective protection to all trade union leaders and members who are
under threat by increasing the budget for such programmes and ensure that protected
individuals do not personally have to bear any costs arising from those schemes;
• take measures to adopt without delay the agreed amendments to eliminate legislative
obstacles to the full exercise of freedom of association and develop legislation to allow
for the formation of trade unions at the sectoral level; ensure the efficient registration
of trade unions, including the implementation of the electronic tool designed by the
ILO; and
• increase the visibility of the awareness-raising campaign on freedom of association in
the media and ensure that there is no stigmatization of trade unions, their leaders and
collective agreements.
Peru (ratification: 1960)
Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87)
The Committee took note of the written and oral information provided by the
Government and the discussion that followed.
The Committee welcomed legislative developments addressing certain previous
observations of the Committee of Experts but expressed concern with ongoing
restrictions in law and practice on the right to freedom of association and the right to
organize.
Taking the discussion into account, the Committee requests the Government, in
consultation with the social partners, to adopt time-bound measures to:
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
• ensure that existing and prospective legislation is in conformity with the Convention;
• ensure that public servants, including judges, prosecutors and employees in positions
of trust and leadership in the public administration, without distinction whatsoever,
have the right in law and practice to establish and join workers’ organizations of their
own choosing;
• ensure the proper functioning of the National Labour and Employment Promotion
Council (CNTPE) with a view to facilitating social dialogue and consultation with the
social partners on labour law reform; and
• ensure in law and practice the right of workers’ and employers’ organizations to
organize their activities and formulate their programmes in full freedom.
The Committee requests the Government to provide information, in consultation
with the social partners, on the application of the Convention in law and in practice
before 1 September 2023.
The Committee invites the Government to accept a direct contacts mission in order
to fully implement these recommendations.
El Salvador (ratification: 1995)
Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144)
The Committee took note of the oral information provided by the Government and
the discussion that followed.
The Committee noted the allegations of serious and repeated violations of the
Convention by the Government.
The Committee noted with deep concern the multiple allegations of interference by
the authorities in the appointment of employers’ and workers’ representatives in public
tripartite and joint bodies.
Taking the discussion into account, the Committee urges the Government, in
consultation with the social partners, to:
• immediately cease all acts of violence, threats, persecution, stigmatization,
intimidation or any other form of aggression against individuals or organizations in
connection with both the exercise of legitimate trade union activities and the activities
of employers’ organizations, and adopt measures to ensure that such acts are not
repeated, in particular for the National Business Association (ANEP) and its members;
• refrain from any interference in the exercise of freedom of association of employers
and workers, including in the constitution of workers’ and employers’ organizations;
• put a stop to the delays in issuing the credentials of workers’ and employers’
organizations, including for ANEP, in line with their right to representation;
• ensure that all workers’ and employers’ organizations, including ANEP, enjoy the rights
and freedoms under the Convention and are fully included in tripartite consultation
and social dialogue;
• reactivate, without delay, the full operation of the Higher Labour Council (CST) and
other tripartite bodies as well as ensure the development and adoption, in
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
consultation with social partners, of clear, objective, predictable and legally binding
rules to ensure their effective and independent functioning, without any external
interference;
• take without delay all necessary measures to repeal the legal obligation on trade
unions to request renewal of their legal status every 12 months;
• amend the 23 decrees adopted on 3 June 2021 to ensure that employers’ organizations
are able to exercise their right to freely elect their representatives without any
external interference; and
• develop a time-bound road map to implement without delay all the recommendations
made by the 2022 ILO High-Level Tripartite Mission and the Committee’s
recommendations.
The Committee requests the Government to accept a direct contacts mission to
ensure full compliance with the Convention.
The Committee further requests the Government to submit a detailed report on the
implementation of the Convention in law and practice, including information on the
content and outcome of tripartite consultations, to the Committee of Experts by
1 September 2023.
Guinea-Bissau (ratification: 1977)
Minimum Wage-Fixing Machinery Convention, 1928 (No. 26)
The Committee took note of the oral information provided by the Government and
the discussion that followed.
Despite some steps taken to adjust the national minimum wage, the Committee
regretted that it has still not been fixed and that the minimum wage has not been revised
since 1988.
Taking into account the discussion, the Committee calls upon the Government, in
consultation with the social partners, to:
• review the minimum wage for the public and private sectors without delay in
accordance with the Convention; and
• establish the minimum wage fixing machinery in consultation with the social partners
with a view to fixing and updating the minimum wage on a regular basis in accordance
with the Convention.
The Committee also requests the Government to:
• strengthen social dialogue, including the machinery for consultations with workers’
and employers’ organizations, by ensuring their independence and autonomy in law
and practice; and
• provide to the Committee of Experts a copy of the promulgated and published version
of the new Labour Code.
The Committee requests the Government to avail itself of ILO technical assistance
in close cooperation with freely established and independent workers’ and employers’
organizations to ensure full compliance with the Convention and to transmit a report on
progress made to the Committee of Experts by 1 September 2023.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
Nepal (ratification: 2002)
Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182)
The Committee noted the written and oral information provided by the Government
and the discussion that followed.
The Committee noted the initiatives taken by the Government to address the worst
forms of child labour.
The Committee noted with deep concern the persistence of the phenomenon,
including agricultural-based bonded labour, commercial sexual exploitation and
hazardous work in the brick kiln industry.
Taking into account the discussion, the Committee requests the Government, in
consultation with the social partners, to:
• eliminate the worst forms of child labour, notably in agriculture, the brick kiln industry
and the entertainment industry, and to ensure that child victims of such hazardous
work are removed from these situations and rehabilitated, particularly through access
to free education and vocational training;
• scale up its efforts to end child labour through a multi-causal approach and adopt
policies to address the root causes of child labour;
• continue its efforts to ensure that all child victims of bonded labour receive adequate
services for their rehabilitation and social integration, including access to free, basic
and quality education; and to continue to provide information on measures taken in
this regard, as well as on child victims of bonded labour who have been rehabilitated;
• take effective and time-bound measures to remove children from commercial sexual
exploitation, bonded labour in agriculture and hazardous work in the entertainment
and brick kiln industry and to provide adequate assistance for their rehabilitation and
social integration and provide information to the Committee of Experts on the
measures taken in this regard and the results achieved, indicating the number of
children under 18 years removed and rehabilitated;
• increase material resources to the Ministry of Labour, Employment and Social Security
to help combat the worst forms of child labour;
• provide information to the Committee of Experts on the application in practice of
section 72 in relation to sections 66(3)(d), (h), (j) of the Act Relating to Children, 2018
for the offences related to the use, procuring or offering of children for the production
of pornography or pornographic performances, indicating the number of cases
reported, prosecutions, convictions and penalties applied;
• redouble efforts to combat trafficking in children and provide information to the
Committee of Experts on the activities undertaken by the Nepal Police and the highlevel task force, in monitoring and identifying victims of trafficking, and on the
number of cases of trafficking of children identified, investigations, prosecutions and
convictions carried out and the penalties imposed;
• improve the functioning of the education system to facilitate access to free, basic and
quality education for all children, particularly girls and indigenous children, and to
take measures to increase the school enrolment, attendance and completion rates and
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
to decrease the school drop-out rates, and provide information to the Committee of
Experts on the measures taken in this regard, and on the results achieved; and
• provide information on the practical implementation of sanctions related to the newly
introduced offences of child sexual abuse, as well as on the number of cases reported,
prosecutions and convictions carried out, and penalties applied.
The Committee requests the Government to continue to avail itself of ILO technical
assistance to ensure full compliance with the Convention without delay, focusing
especially on:
• providing capacity-building to the labour administration, labour inspectorate and
other public authorities in charge of combating child labour and protecting children;
• reinforcing policy coherence and coordination at the national and regional level.
The Committee requests the Government to provide information as requested by
the Committee of Experts before 1 September 2023, together with detailed information
on the measures taken to implement these recommendations.
Adoption of the report and closing remarks
203. The Committee’s report was adopted, as amended.
204. Employer members: It has been a very rich and interesting discussion, particularly for me, this
being my first time as spokesperson. I have now the greatest respect for the work of my
predecessor, Sonia Regenbogen and my counterpart Marc Leemans for the work that is
involved in this process. It has been quite an eye-opening experience and I have to say that I
now have an even greater respect also for the way the system works because, as we all know,
the process of reporting by 1 September translates into an enormous amount of work behind
the scenes at the Office and the Labour Standards Department, which then translates into a
draft report that goes to the Committee of Experts who ultimately add their views, which are
then translated into the report we all see and of course the basis for what we do here. So, the
cyclical aspect of this is monumental in volume and yet it all gets done on time. I wish to pay
tribute to the Office for that work and for the comprehensiveness of it because it is that
material that we use to draw the conclusions, as well as the input from governments.
205. I would like to thank the governments for the fact that they have contributed so fully to the
whole process. It is the additional information we get on top of reports that gives colour,
flavour and a link to reality to the work that we do. It greatly assists the ability of the Worker
and Employer members to draft the conclusions that we reach. I quite appreciate that the
conclusions are not always to the liking of the governments that receive them. There are times
when the Committee is called upon to do things that are less palatable than it would like them
to be. However, we equally see, and I have received a great deal of comment about this from
Government, Worker and Employer members, that the reflections are in fact balanced and fair
and that the Committee has heard what has been said and has translated that information into
a workable reality for them.
206. I want to pay tribute also to the Worker members, and particularly to my counterpart Marc
Leemans, who has been incredible, not only good humoured, but patient with me as I learn at
this role. He has demonstrated a great deal of expertise and his knowledge in terms of the
ways that the process is put together. Both of us come from a long background of industrial
relations and collective bargaining, and the feel of the process is not foreign to us, but the
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
mechanics of it will still be something new for me and Marc. I thank you for the patience you
have shown with me through that process. We did deliver on time, and I think we delivered
results that most people can live with, which is great.
207. Lastly, I want to pay tribute to my team, who has done enormous amounts of work behind the
scenes, the team from the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) and the team from
the ILO Office for Employers’ Activities (ACT/EMP). I saw it in the Employer members’ meeting
this morning. It is a bit like being a surgeon, where you have a top-notch team behind you. The
job gets done because when you put your hand out, you get the right tool at the right time,
and you get gently reminded to make sure you take all the tools back out again before you
close the case. So, with all of that, I would like to close by saying thank you to everybody; it has
been a great experience and I look forward to next year.
208. Worker members: We have come to the end of our session, and this is also the time to take
stock. We can already say that we have had interesting, open and generally fruitful discussions.
I wish to emphasize that all the cases we have examined had a reason for being on the list and
were agreed by consensus. There is no need to issue reservations in this regard. We recall that
the exercise of certain responsibilities implies accepting the result. The same applies to the
presence of the governments whose cases are being discussed. The fact of being on the long
list means that provision must be made to be present in Geneva from the start of the
Conference.
209. The adoption of the conclusions illustrates the capacity of our Committee to reach agreements
despite differences of opinion. I note in passing that we have been able to hold our discussions
within the times and limits set. The concerns that some participants had in this regard in the
end turned out to be unjustified.
210. I just mentioned the openness of our exchanges. I am thinking in particular of those dedicated
to the right to strike. Each group had the opportunity to recall its position on the subject. The
discussion of certain cases had the merit of demonstrating that there is no more margin for
more dialogue and that we have no doubt reached the limits of this discussion. It is therefore
high time to act upon the options set out by the Constitution to end this dispute that has
persisted for too long. It is high time also to ensure legal certainty with regard to this issue.
211. Our Committee has also been able to reflect on its place among and links with the other
supervisory bodies, in particular the Committee of Experts. Our group took note of the meeting
between governments and the Committee of Experts, and we refer to the comments expressed
in this regard.
212. We have become accustomed to recalling the support of the Worker members for the
independence and autonomy of the Committee of Experts. At the risk of repeating it for the
hundredth time, there is no difference in opinion between our two committees. There are,
however, some differences in opinion between the Employer and Worker members on certain
very specific subjects. The stability, credibility and balance of the supervisory system means
that the Committee of Experts must not focus on these differences. Its mission means that it
must carry out its own assessment of these issues within the framework of a permanent
dialogue with Member States. Some regularly call for more convergence between our two
committees. They do not seem to realize that of around 95 per cent of the issues addressed,
this convergence is already there, as our conclusions are in line with the observations of the
Committee of Experts. Certainly, there are sometimes different nuances, which are largely
explained by the nature of our Committee, whose role is different from the Committee of
Experts. The Worker members are convinced that we should move forward and leave these
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
sterile discussions behind us. We must ensure legal certainty and reflect on ways and means
to really improve our impact.
213. The ILO mandate aims to recognize and defend workers’ rights. All ILO actions must gravitate
around this objective. This is what we are pointing at through a more all-encompassing notion,
that is, social justice. Workers’ rights are the yardstick to measure the actions and projects
undertaken. I do not need to recall the degree of eloquence of the Declaration of Philadelphia
in this regard. This Declaration underscores that all programmes and actions must be assessed
in the light of this fundamental objective. As proof of this, you can read any ILO instrument to
realize that this is the ultimate goal and that the other aspects are only a means to an end. I
also recall that the resolution adopted by the Conference in 2007 unequivocally states that
compliance with international standards is a condition for the sustainability of enterprises.
214. With these considerations in mind, we can but express astonishment at attempts to put
workers’ rights on an equal footing with the development of sustainable enterprises. There is
no equivalence between these two terms. The guarantee of workers’ rights is the objective,
targeted and sustainable enterprises are only a means to achieve that. It is our duty to remove
this kind of confusion because to promote an idea, it must not come under any ambiguity or
ambivalence.
215. I cannot conclude without giving thanks to certain people as is custom. On behalf of the Worker
members, I give sincere thanks to the Chairperson of our Committee who directed the work
with composure, our Reporter for her conscientious work and the whole of the secretariat,
which has carried out a colossal amount of work. A special mention goes to the representative
of the Secretary-General, Ms Corinne Vargha, for her relentless investment, and that of her
team. Thanks also to the interpreters and the technical staff, the delegates who contributed to
our discussions for their inputs, and the Employer spokesperson, Mr Paul Mackay, who
underwent his baptism of fire.
216. Of course, I also give thanks to my group, the Worker members, for their active participation
and their solidarity. I mention in particular those who accepted the role of spokesperson in the
examination of certain cases: Catherine Schlachter, Nina Mjoberg, Mikyung Ryu, Tjalling
Postma, Stephen Russell, Losi Zingiswa, Clare Middlemas, Alejandra Ortega Fuentes and Marta
Pujadas. I also thank my direct collaborators from the International Trade Union Confederation
(ITUC) and the ILO Bureau for Workers’ Activities (ACTRAV). Thank you all for your attention
and I wish you the best going forward.
217. The Government member of Sweden speaking on behalf of the EU and its Member States:
The candidate countries, Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, North Macedonia, the Republic of
Moldova, Montenegro and Serbia, the potential candidate country Georgia, the EFTA countries,
Iceland and Norway, members of the European Economic Area, align themselves with this
statement. We would like to start by warmly thanking the Chairperson of the Committee for
his efficient leadership of the discussions and his very good time management. We also extend
our warm thanks to the Vice-Chairpersons and the Reporter for their constructive spirit,
contributions and efficiency. We also thank the Office for its dedicated support and guidance
throughout the sittings. We appreciate that we have come back to a pre-COVID schedule,
examined 24 cases and met fully in person.
218. We welcome the discussions and constituents’ positive approach and engagement in the
process. The Conference Committee embodies a true essence of mutual respect and
tripartism. We strongly believe that commitment to the work of the Committee to improve the
effective implementation of ILO Conventions should remain a priority for all constituents. We
strongly believe in the fundamental importance of international labour standards, their
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
ratification, and the effective, independent and authoritative supervision of their
implementation. We share the view that human rights, including international labour
standards, are fundamental for relations between peoples and nations. Through the EU Action
Plan on Human Rights and Democracy we have placed an increased emphasis on human
rights, including labour rights.
219. We are very pleased that UN human rights treaty bodies and the ILO supervisory bodies are
reinforcing their cooperation in order to promote human rights, including labour rights, and
ensure that international labour standards are included in the UN Sustainable Development
Cooperation Frameworks.
220. We highly appreciate the analysis and expertise of the Committee of Experts, which provides
the essential groundwork for the Conference Committee. We recall our strong commitment to
the independence, objectivity and impartiality of the Committee of Experts and its reports. We
are firm advocates of the need for an independent, expert-based, efficient and robust
supervisory system to oversee the implementation of and compliance with ILO Conventions.
We are convinced that a well-functioning and authoritative supervisory system, tripartism and
social dialogue are critical to ensure the credibility of the Organization’s work as a whole.
221. The Conference Committee is a unique mechanism that enables all constituents to discuss the
implementation of ILO Conventions in a constructive, respectful and tripartite manner, based
on objective, impartial and independent observations by the Committee of Experts. It enables
the exchange of views and fosters progress. In this respect, we welcome that the conclusions
of the Conference Committee are more action-oriented, ambitious and achievable, fostering
the commitment of ILO Member States. We encourage the Member States to comply with the
conclusions to the greatest extent possible, where appropriate with the support of ILO’s
technical assistance and/or missions.
222. We appreciate the timely discussion we had on the well-drafted and important General Survey
of the Committee of Experts, which highlights the legal and institutional framework required
to achieve gender equality at work, as well as measures and proposals for future action in
promoting gender equality. We would like to underline and repeat our unequivocal support of
the independent mandate and autonomy of the Committee of Experts to monitor and analyse
the application in law and practice of any ILO Convention.
223. We attach great value to the General Survey as a method of analysing difficulties in the
application of standards and identifying means of overcoming these obstacles. We underline
the importance for ILO Member States to submit reports for its preparation. We appreciate the
observations of social partners in this process.
224. We will continue to fully support and reinforce the ILO’s supervisory system, which operates in
a challenging environment, as we remain convinced that it is one of the most extensive and
valuable elements of the multilateral rules-based order. We are looking forward to constructive
engagement with the Office and the tripartite constituents in the follow-up to the conclusions
of the Committee.
225. Chairperson: It has been an honour for me personally and for my country to represent the
Asia–Pacific group and to have the opportunity, as well as the responsibility, to steer the work
of this very important Committee. It has been an extremely beneficial experience, in the sense
that I got to know “the plumbing of the ILO system”, if I can call it that. Its architecture is vast,
and it was great knowing it in detail. I think even more important for me was to see the
continuing salience, relevance and, I would even say, major importance of this Organization’s
architecture, that is to say, tripartism, norms and standards, given the very serious nature of
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
challenges that we all confront. As some of the social and economic impacts from the pandemic
are evident and still unfolding, we have serious social, economic and other impacts emerging
from the conflict in Ukraine. It is like a perfect storm and, while some of the impacts are visible
and being felt, it seems that there is a lot that is yet to come and the world of work will be
impacted. Hence the salience, the importance and the relevance of this elaborate framework
to promote and protect the rights of the workers but also the employers.
226. In this ecosystem, cooperation and dialogue are the key. I saw that reflected in the willingness
to engage in dialogue and acknowledge the difficulties while renewing the commitment to
work on them with the help and assistance that the ILO provides, that is, the technical
assistance, the advisory services, the missions and other tools that are available. I was struck
by the work that is undertaken not only in terms of developing norms but also on the
operational side. It is a huge machine that often goes unnoticed. Thus, one of my takeaways
to share with my colleagues here in Geneva and elsewhere is the amount of work, good work,
that is done in this ecosystem.
227. I would like to thank all of you, the tripartite constituents, despite the inconvenience that you
faced being split in two rooms. I understand that next year this will no longer be the case and
the historic room of the Committee will be available. I would also like to apologize in case I
interrupted your interventions. This, I can assure you, was only driven by, perhaps, my zeal to
manage the time more efficiently but there was no personal element in that.
228. I would like to thank both the Vice-Chairpersons for their support, for their cooperation and
for their constructive understanding. I would also like to thank the Reporter. I know from my
experience that it is quite a task to deliver on the Reporter’s duties. The two Vice-Chairpersons
and the Reporter were of great help as they replaced me at certain moments when I was called
upon to undertake other unforeseen tasks.
229. Last but not least, I would like to echo the sentiments expressed by Mr Leemans about one
person and her team: representative of the Secretary-General, Ms Corrine Vargha; thank you
so much for all the support, for the wise counsel. I would also like to thank your colleagues,
the coordinators of the Committee’s secretariat, everyone on this podium and those who are
not here. I would also like to particularly thank the interpreters for the long hours and, at times,
having to deal with voice quality and speed of the statements. Also of course, the technicians,
including the sound technicians and those who manage the camera in the room. Thank you
very much for your work. With this, I declare this session of the Committee on the Application
of Standards closed.
Geneva, 15 June 2023
(Signed) H.E. Ambassador Khalil Hashmi
Chairperson
Ms Joanna ?eber
Reporter
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
Annex I
International Labour Conference
111th Session, 2023
? CAN/D.1
Committee on the Application of Standards
Date: 5 May 2023
? Work of the Committee
Work of the Committee
This document (D.1) sets out the manner in which the work of the Committee on the
Application of Standards (the Committee) is carried out. It is submitted to the Committee for
adoption when it begins its work at each session of the Conference. 1 This document reflects
the results of the discussions and informal tripartite consultations that have taken place, since
2002, on the working methods of the Committee, including on the following issues: the
elaboration of the list of individual cases to be discussed by the Committee; the preparation
and adoption of the conclusions relating to these individual cases; time management and
respect for parliamentary rules of decorum.
This document takes into account the outcome of the last informal tripartite consultations on
the working methods of the Committee, held on 5 April 2023. These consultations have taken
due note that the Committee would require to allow it to discharge its constitutional
obligations within the framework of a session of the Conference that marks a return to inperson participation and in particular discussed the opportunity of maintaining certain
measures that were taken to address the special circumstances in the context of the COVID-19
pandemic but could contribute to the ongoing smooth functioning of the Committee’s work.
Terms of reference and composition of the Committee,
voting procedure and report to the Conference
Under its terms of reference as defined in article 10, paragraph 1, the Conference shall
establish a Committee on the Application of Standards to consider:
compliance by Members with their obligations to communicate information and reports
under articles 19, 22, 23 and 35 of the Constitution;
Since 2010, the document is appended to the General Report of the Committee.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
individual cases relating to the measures taken by Members to give effect to the
Conventions to which they are parties;
the law and practice of Members with regard to selected Conventions to which they are
not parties and Recommendations, as chosen by the Governing Body (General Survey).
In accordance with article 10, paragraph 2, of the Standing Orders, the Committee shall also
consider reports transmitted by the Governing Body to the Conference for the Committee’s
consideration.
In accordance with article 10, paragraph 3, of the Standing Orders, no resolutions may be
submitted under article 41 to the Committee on the Application of Standards.
In accordance with article 10, paragraph 4, of the Standing Orders, the Committee shall submit
a report to the Conference. Since 2007, in response to the wishes expressed by ILO
constituents, the report of the Committee has been published both in the Record of Proceedings
of the Conference and as a separate publication, to improve the visibility of the Committee’s
work.
Questions related to the composition of the Committee, the right to participate in its work and
the voting procedure are regulated by Part 4 of the Standing Orders of the Conference.
Each year, the Committee elects its Officers: its Chairperson and Vice-Chairpersons, as well as
its Reporter.
III. Working documents
Report of the Committee of Experts
The basic working document of the Committee is the report of the Committee of Experts on
the Application of Conventions and Recommendations (Report III (Parts A and B)), printed in
two volumes.
Report III (Part A) contains the General Report of the Committee of Experts (Part One), the
observations of the Committee of Experts concerning the sending of reports, the application
of ratified Conventions and the obligation to submit the Conventions and Recommendations
to the competent authorities in Member States (Part Two), the Joint statement by the ILO
Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations and UN
Human Rights Treaty Bodies Chairpersons (Addendum). At the beginning of the report there
is an index of comments by Convention and by country. In addition to the observations
contained in its report, the Committee of Experts has, as in previous years, made direct
requests which are communicated to governments by the Office on the Committee’s behalf. 2
Report III (Part B) contains the General Survey prepared by the Committee of Experts on a
group of Conventions and Recommendations decided upon by the Governing Body.
Summaries of reports
At its 267th Session (November 1996), the Governing Body approved new measures for
rationalization and simplification of the arrangements for the presentation by the Director-
See para. 107 of the General Report of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations,
Report III (Part A), International Labour Conference, 111th Session, 2023. A list of direct requests can be found in Appendix
VII of Report III (Part A).
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
General to the Conference of summaries of reports submitted by governments under articles
19, 22 and 35 of the Constitution. 3 Requests for consultation or copies of reports may be
addressed to the secretariat of the Committee.
Other information
The secretariat prepares documents (which are referred to, and referenced, as “D documents”)
which are made available 4 during the course of the work of the Committee through its web
page to provide the following information:
reports and information which have reached the International Labour Office since the last
meeting of the Committee of Experts; based on this information, the list of governments
which are invited to supply information to the Conference Committee due to serious
failure to respect their reporting and other standards-related obligations is updated; 5
written information supplied by governments to the Conference Committee in reply to
the observations made by the Committee of Experts, when these governments are on the
preliminary list of cases or on the list of individual cases adopted by the Conference
Committee; 6
written information supplied by governments that have been requested to supply
information on cases of serious failure to respect reporting or other standards-related
obligations for the stated periods; 7
written information supplied by delegates for the general discussion. 8
IV. General discussion
In accordance with its usual practice, the Committee begins its work with the consideration of
its working methods on the basis of this document. The Committee then holds a discussion on
general aspects of the application of Conventions and Recommendations and the discharge
by Member States of standards-related obligations under the ILO Constitution, which is
primarily based on the General Report of the Committee of Experts.
During the informal tripartite consultations held in April 2023, it was decided to continue the
practice adopted on an exceptional basis in 2021 and 2022 to allow the possibility for delegates
to submit written information. Information received prior to the relevant sitting will be
published as early as possible, to the extent possible translated into three languages, and
included in the Committee’s final report. 9 It was also decided that in order to provide guidance
to the speakers, speaking time limits could be suggested and that the speaking time limits for
the discussion of the General Survey could be used as a basis.
The Committee will also hold a discussion on the General Survey, entitled Achieving gender
equality at work. The General Survey concerns the Discrimination (Employment and
See report of the Committee of Experts, Report III (Part A), Appendices I, II, IV, V and VI; and Report III (Part B), Appendix II.
D documents will be made available online on the Committee’s dedicated web page.
See below Part V.
See below Part VI (supply of information).
See below Part V.
See below Part IV.
The Committee’s report will distinguish between written information and information shared orally.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111), the Workers with Family Responsibilities Convention,
1981 (No. 156), the Maternity Protection Convention, 2000 (No. 183), the Discrimination
(Employment and Occupation) Recommendation, 1958 (No. 111), the Workers with Family
Responsibilities Recommendation, 1981 (No. 165) and the Maternity Protection
Recommendation, 2000 (No. 191). 10
At the informal tripartite consultations in April 2023, it was decided that the total time for the
discussion of the General Survey should be a maximum of four hours. The usual speaking times
have been increased for the initial remarks of the Employer and Worker spokespersons, as well
as for the Government groups (see below, Part IX).
Cases of serious failure by Member States to respect
their reporting and other standards-related obligations
Governments are invited to supply information on cases of serious failure to respect reporting
or other standards-related obligations for stated periods. These cases are considered in a
dedicated sitting of the Committee. Governments that submit the required information or
reports before the sitting will not be called before the Committee. The discussion of the
Committee, including any explanations of difficulties that may have been provided by the
governments concerned, and the conclusions adopted by the Committee under each criterion
are reflected in its report.
In the context of the informal tripartite consultations in April 2023, it was decided to maintain
the possibility for the governments concerned to communicate written information on such
failures one week before the date of the special sitting, that is Tuesday, 30 May 2023. This
information will be published in three languages prior to the sitting.
During the sitting, the governments concerned may, if they so wish, provide information on
any new development and the Employer and Worker spokespersons will present their remarks
on this subject.
It should be recalled that the Committee identifies the cases on the basis of criteria which are
as follows: 11
• none of the reports on ratified Conventions have been supplied during the past two years
or more;
• first reports on ratified Conventions have not been supplied for at least two years;
• none of the reports on unratified Conventions and Recommendations requested under
article 19, paragraphs 5, 6 and 7, of the Constitution have been supplied during the past five
years;
It should be recalled that the subjects of General Surveys have been aligned with the strategic objectives that are examined
in the context of the recurrent discussions under the follow-up to the ILO Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalization
(2008), as amended in 2022.
These criteria were last examined by the Committee in 1980 (see Provisional Record No. 37, International Labour
Conference, 66th Session, 1980, para. 30).
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
• no indication is available on whether steps have been taken to submit the instruments
adopted during the last seven sessions of the Conference to the competent authorities, in
accordance with article 19 of the Constitution; 12
• no information has been received as regards all or most of the observations and direct
requests of the Committee of Experts to which a reply was requested for the period under
consideration;
• the government has failed during the past three years to indicate the representative
organizations of employers and workers to which, in accordance with article 23, paragraph
2, of the Constitution, copies of reports and information supplied to the Office have been
communicated.
At its 88th and 89th Sessions (2017 and 2018), the Committee of Experts decided to institute a
new practice of launching “urgent appeals” on cases corresponding to certain criteria of
serious reporting failure. 13 The aim is also to draw the attention of the Committee to these
cases, so that governments may be called before it. Thus, at its session in November–
December 2022, the Committee of Experts issued urgent appeals to nine countries that had
failed to send the reports requested for three years or more. 14 The countries to which urgent
appeals have been addressed will be invited to provide information to the Committee during
the examination of cases of serious failure to comply with reporting obligations.
VI. Individual cases
The Committee considers a certain number of cases relating to the application of ratified
Conventions. These cases, so-called “individual cases”, are selected on the basis of the
observations published in the report of the Committee of Experts.
Preliminary list
Since 2006, an early communication to governments of a preliminary list of individual cases for
possible discussion by the Committee concerning the application of ratified Conventions has
been instituted. Since 2015, the preliminary list of cases has been made available 30 days
before the opening of the International Labour Conference. The preliminary list is a response
to the requests from governments for early notification, so that they may better prepare
themselves for a possible intervention before the Committee. This list may not in any way be
considered definitive, as the adoption of a final list is a function that only the Committee itself
can assume. During the informal tripartite consultations of March 2019, it was decided to
provide the opportunity for governments appearing on the preliminary list of cases to provide,
if they so wished, written information to the Committee. This information provided, on a purely
voluntary basis, should concern only new developments not yet examined by the Committee
of Experts. They must be transmitted in at least one of the three working languages of the
Office at the latest two weeks before the beginning of the opening of the session of the
This time frame begins at the 99th Session (2010) and concludes at the 108th Session (2019) of the International Labour
Conference, bearing in mind that the Conference did not adopt any Conventions or Recommendations during the 97th (2008),
98th (2009), 102nd (2013) and 107th (2018) Sessions.
See paras 9 and 10 of the General Report of the Committee of Experts, Report III (Part A), International Labour Conference,
107th Session, 2018.
See “general comments”, section I of Part II of the Report of the Committee of Experts, Report III (Part A).
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
Conference 15 and, to the extent possible, shall not exceed 2,000 words. A specific template for
transmission of the information is available on the web page of the Committee.
Establishment of the list of cases
The list of individual cases is submitted to the Committee for adoption, after the Employers’
and Workers’ groups have met to discuss and adopt it. The final list is normally adopted at the
beginning of the Committee’s work. In the context of the informal tripartite consultations in
April 2023, it was decided that the final list, this year again, could be adopted during the first
sitting of the session of the Committee, to be held on Monday afternoon, 5 June 2023.
As of the revision in 2015 of the criteria for the selection of cases, the selection should take into
consideration, on balance, the following elements:
the nature of the comments of the Committee of Experts, in particular the existence of a
footnote;
the quality and scope of responses provided by the government or the absence of a
response on its part;
the seriousness and persistence of shortcomings in the application of the Convention;
the urgency of a specific situation;
comments received by employers’ and workers’ organizations;
the nature of a specific situation (if it raises a hitherto undiscussed question, or if the case
presents an interesting approach to solving questions of application);
the discussions and conclusions of the Conference Committee of previous sessions and,
in particular, the existence of a special paragraph;
the likelihood that discussing the case would have a tangible impact;
balance between fundamental, governance and technical Conventions;
geographical balance; and
balance between developed and developing countries.
There is also the possibility of examining one case of progress as was done in 2006, 2007, 2008
and 2013. 16
Since 2007, it has been the practice to follow the adoption of the list of individual cases with an
informal information session for governments, hosted by the Employer and Worker ViceChairpersons, to explain the criteria used for the selection of individual cases.
Automatic registration
Since 2010, cases included in the final list have been automatically registered and scheduled
by the Office, on the basis of a rotating alphabetical system, following the French alphabetical
order. The “A+5” model has been chosen to ensure a genuine rotation of countries on the list.
This year, the registration will begin with countries with the letter “I”. Cases will be divided into
two groups: the first group of countries to be registered following the above alphabetical order
will consist of those cases in which the Committee of Experts requested governments to submit
Before Monday 22 May 2023.
See paras 119–125 of the General Report of the Committee of Experts. The criteria developed by the Committee of Experts
for identifying cases of progress are also reproduced in Appendix II of this document.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
full particulars to the Conference (“double-footnoted cases”). 17 The Office will then register the
second group, which will comprise the other cases on the final list, also following the abovementioned alphabetical order. In the context of the informal tripartite consultations in April
2023, it was agreed that the Office would adapt this practice in respect of planning to take
account of the complexity of cases in order to ensure a certain predictability for the
government and social partners of the country concerned.
Information on the agenda of the Committee and the date on which cases may be heard is
available:
through the Daily Bulletin and the Committee’s dedicated web page;
by means of a D document containing the list of individual cases and the working schedule
for the examination of these cases, which is made available to the Committee as soon as
possible after the adoption of the list of cases. 18
Supply of information
Prior to their oral intervention before the Conference Committee, governments may submit
written information that will be summarized by the Office and made available to the
Committee. 19 This written information is to be provided to the Office at least two days before
the discussion of the case. It serves to complement the oral intervention by the Government
representative of the country concerned. It may not reproduce the information contained in
the oral statement nor any other information already provided by the government. The total
number of pages is not to exceed five.
Adoption of conclusions
The conclusions regarding individual cases are proposed by the Vice-Chairpersons and
submitted by the Chairperson to the Committee for adoption. The conclusions should take due
account of the elements raised in the discussion and information provided in writing by the
government. The conclusions should be short, clear and specify the action expected of
governments. They may also include reference to the technical assistance to be provided by
the Office. The conclusions should reflect consensus recommendations. Divergent views can
be reflected in the Committee’s Record of Proceedings.
Conclusions on the cases discussed will be adopted at dedicated sittings. During the informal
tripartite consultations in April 2023, it was agreed that the conclusions of all the individual
cases continue to be adopted at the end of the session of the Committee. 20 It has also been
decided to maintain the practice implemented in 2021 and 2022 under which the draft
conclusions are transmitted to a person designated by the government concerned a few hours
before the adoption of the text. During the sitting, the conclusions are made visible on a
screen. The Government representatives may take the floor after the Chairperson has
announced the adoption of the conclusions.
See para. 117 of the General Report of the Committee of Experts.
Since 2010, this document is appended to the General Report of the Committee.
See above, Part III(C).
The two sittings dedicated to the adoption of conclusions on individual cases are scheduled for Wednesday afternoon, 14
June, and Thursday morning, 15 June.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
As per the Committee’s decision in 1980, 21 Part One of its report will contain a section entitled
“Application of ratified Conventions”, in which the Committee draws the attention of the
Conference to: (i) cases of progress, where governments have introduced changes in their law
and practice in order to eliminate divergences previously discussed by the Committee; (ii)
certain special cases, which are mentioned in special paragraphs of the report; and (iii) cases
of continued failure over several years to eliminate serious deficiencies in the application of
ratified Conventions which it had previously discussed – including “urgent appeals” (see section
VII. Participation in the work of the Committee
As regards failure by a government to take part in the discussion concerning its country,
despite repeated invitations by the Committee, the following measures will be applied, in
conformity with the decision taken by the Committee at the 73rd Session of the Conference
(1987), as amended at the 97th Session of the Conference (2008), 22 and mention will be made
in the relevant part of the Committee’s report:
• In accordance with the usual practice, after having established the list of cases regarding
which Government delegates might be invited to supply information to the Committee, the
Committee shall invite the governments of the countries concerned in writing, and the Daily
Bulletin shall regularly mention these countries.
• Three days before the end of the discussion of individual cases, the Chairperson of the
Committee shall request the Clerk of the Conference to announce every day the names of
the countries whose representatives have not yet responded to the Committee’s invitation,
urging them to do so as soon as possible.
• On the last day of the discussion of individual cases, the Committee shall deal with the cases
in which governments have not responded to the invitation. Given the importance of the
Committee’s mandate, assigned to it in 1926, to provide a tripartite forum for dialogue on
outstanding issues relating to the application of ratified international labour Conventions, a
refusal by a government to participate in the work of the Committee is a significant obstacle
to the attainment of the core objectives of the International Labour Organization. For this
reason, the Committee may discuss the substance of the cases concerning governments
which are registered and present at the Conference, but which have chosen not to be
present before the Committee. The debate which ensues in such cases will be reflected in
the appropriate part of the report, concerning both individual cases and participation in the
work of the Committee. In the case of governments that are not present at the Conference,
the Committee will not discuss the substance of the case, but will draw attention in its report
to the importance of the questions raised. 23 In both situations, a particular emphasis will be
put on steps to be taken to resume the dialogue.
See footnote 11.
See Provisional Record No. 24, International Labour Conference, 73rd Session, 1987, para. 33; and Provisional Record No. 19,
International Labour Conference, 97th Session, 2008, para. 174.
In the case of a government which is not accredited or registered to the Conference, the Committee will not discuss the
substance of the case, but will draw attention in its report to the importance of the questions raised. It was considered that
no country should use inclusion on the preliminary list of individual cases as a reason for failing to ensure that it was
accredited to the Conference. If a country on the preliminary list registered after the final list was approved, it should be
asked to provide explanations (see Provisional Record No. 18, International Labour Conference, 100th Session, 2011, Part I/54).
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
VIII. Minutes of the sittings – Verbatim
In the context of the informal tripartite consultations on the working methods of the
Committee of November 2018 and March 2019, it was decided that the general discussion, the
discussion of the General Survey, as well as the discussion of cases of serious failure to respect
reporting or other standards-related obligations and the discussion of individual cases will be
produced in the form of verbatim transcripts. Each intervention will be reproduced in extenso
in the language of work in which it has been delivered, or failing that, chosen by the
government – English, French or Spanish – and the verbatim draft minutes will be made
available online on the Committee’s dedicated web page. 24 It is the Committee’s practice to
accept amendments to the verbatim draft minutes of previous sittings prior to their adoption
by the Committee. The time available to delegates to submit amendments to the verbatim
draft minutes will be clearly indicated by the Chairperson when they are made available to the
Committee. The amendments should appear clearly in the relevant document and submitted
electronically. 25 In order to avoid delays in the preparation of the Committee’s report, no
amendments may be accepted once the draft minutes have been approved. To the extent that
the discussions are reproduced in extenso in the form of verbatim draft minutes, their
amendments will be limited exclusively to the elimination of transcription errors.
Following the informal tripartite consultations, it was also decided to reorganize the two parts
of the Committee’s report. The first part of the report of the Committee will contain the
verbatim minutes of the general discussion, the outcome of the discussions on the General
Survey, the conclusions adopted following the examination of the “automatic” cases and the
examination of the “individual” cases – including, where appropriate, the special paragraphs –
as well as the verbatim minutes of the discussion on the adoption of the report and the closing
remarks. This first part of the report will be produced in the form of a consolidated document
and will be translated into the three languages for adoption by the Conference in plenary
session.
The second part of the report of the Committee will consist of trilingual (patchwork) verbatim
minutes of the discussion of the General Survey, the discussion of “automatic” cases and the
discussion of “individual” cases. These verbatim minutes will be available online on the
Committee’s web page as they are adopted. The second part of the report of the Committee
will be submitted to the plenary sitting of the Conference for adoption only in electronic format.
The full report (first and second parts) translated into the three languages will be made
available online 30 days after its adoption by the plenary sitting of the Conference.
IX. Time management
Every effort will be made so that sessions start on time and the schedule is respected. During
the informal tripartite consultations in April 2023, it was decided to return to the speaking time
limits established before the pandemic with some adjustments as mentioned above. The
speaking times will be as follows.
• With regard to the discussion of individual cases:
These new modalities result from the informal tripartite consultations of March 2016. Delegates who will be intervening in
a language other than English, French or Spanish will be able to indicate to the secretariat in which of these three working
languages their intervention should be reflected in the verbatim draft minutes.
Please refer to Appendix III or contact the secretariat in relation to the procedure for amendments to draft minutes.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
? 15 minutes for the government whose case is being discussed;
? 10 minutes for the spokespersons of the Workers’ and the Employers’ groups;
? 10 minutes for the Employer and Worker members, respectively, from the country
concerned, to be divided between the different speakers of each group;
? 7 minutes for Government groups;
? 5 minutes for the other members; 26
? 15 minutes for the concluding remarks by the government whose case is being discussed;
? 10 minutes for the concluding remarks by the spokespersons of the Workers’ and the
Employers’ groups.
• With regard to the general discussion, and for guidance purposes: 27
? 20 minutes for the spokespersons of the Workers’ and the Employers’ groups;
? 15 minutes for the representative of the Secretary-General, the Chairperson of the
Committee of Experts and the Chairperson of the Committee on Freedom of Association;
? 12 minutes for statements by Government groups;
? 5 minutes for the other members.
• With regard to the discussion of the General Survey: 28
? 20 minutes for the spokespersons of the Workers’ and the Employers’ groups;
? 12 minutes for Government groups;
? 5 minutes for the other members;
? 10 minutes for the concluding remarks by the spokespersons of the Workers’ and the
Employers’ groups.
Both for the general discussion and for the discussion of the General Survey, the Chairperson,
in consultation with the other Officers of the Committee, may nevertheless decide to reduce
the time limits where the situation of a case would warrant it, for instance, where there is a
very long list of speakers; on the understanding that the total duration of the discussion of the
General Survey should not exceed four hours. These time limits will be announced by the
Chairperson at the beginning of each sitting and will be strictly enforced.
During interventions, the remaining time available to speakers will be displayed on the screen
and will be visible to all speakers. Once the maximum speaking time has been reached, the
speaker will be interrupted.
The list of speakers will also be visible on the screen. The delegates should register on that list
as soon as possible. 29 At the informal tripartite consultations in 2022 and 2023, it was decided
This time limit may be reduced to three minutes by the Chairperson, in consultation with the other Officers of the
Committee, for instance where there is a very long list of speakers. In this case, the Office will try as far as possible to inform
the delegates on the list of speakers.
At the informal tripartite consultations in April 2023, it was decided that, in order to provide guidance to the speakers, it
would be appropriate to propose speaking times based on those set for discussion of the General Survey.
These arrangements result from the informal tripartite consultations of March 2016 and April 2023.
These arrangements result from the informal tripartite consultations of March 2016.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
to maintain the practice of drawing up a list of speakers 24 hours before the examination of
each item on the Committee’s agenda. Delegates who are accredited to the Conference and
registered in the Committee should request their inclusion on the list of speakers by sending
speakers registered. Speakers who have not registered in advance may be given the floor if
time allows.
Respect of rules of decorum and role of the Chairperson
All delegates have an obligation to the Conference to abide by parliamentary language and by
the generally accepted procedure. Interventions should be relevant to the subject under
discussion and should avoid references to extraneous matters.
It is the role and task of the Chairperson to maintain order and to ensure that the Committee
does not deviate from its fundamental purpose to provide an international tripartite forum for
full and frank debate within the boundaries of respect and decorum essential to making
effective progress towards the aims and objectives of the International Labour Organization.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
Appendix 1
Criteria developed by the Committee of Experts for footnotes
Excerpts of the General Report of the Committee of Experts (ILC.111/III(A))
As in the past, the Committee has indicated by special notes (traditionally known as
“footnotes”) at the end of its comments the cases in which, because of the nature of the
problems encountered in the application of the Conventions concerned, it has deemed
it appropriate to ask the government to supply a report earlier than would otherwise
have been the case and, in some instances, to supply full particulars to the Conference
at its next session in June 2023.
In order to identify cases for which it inserts special notes, the Committee uses the basic
criteria described below, while taking into account the following general considerations.
First, the criteria are indicative. In exercising its discretion in the application of the
criteria, the Committee may also have regard to the specific circumstances of the
country and the length of the reporting cycle. Second, the criteria are applicable to cases
in which an earlier report is requested, often referred to as a “single footnote”, as well
as to cases in which the government is requested to provide detailed information to the
Conference, often referred to as a “double footnote”. The difference between these two
categories is one of degree. Third, a serious case otherwise justifying a special note to
provide full particulars to the Conference (double footnote) might only be given a special
note to provide an early report (single footnote) when there has been a recent discussion
of the case in the Conference Committee. Finally, the Committee wishes to point out that
it exercises restraint in its recourse to “double footnotes” in deference to the Conference
Committee’s decisions as to the cases it wishes to discuss.
The criteria to which the Committee has regard are the following:
the seriousness of the problem; in this respect, the Committee emphasizes that an
important consideration is the necessity to view the problem in the context of a
particular Convention and to take into account matters involving fundamental
rights, workers’ health, safety and well-being, as well as any adverse impact,
including at the international level, on workers and other categories of protected
persons;
the persistence of the problem;
the urgency of the situation; the evaluation of such urgency is necessarily case
specific, according to standard human rights criteria, such as life-threatening
situations or problems where irreversible harm is foreseeable; and
the quality and scope of the government’s response in its reports or the absence
of response to the issues raised by the Committee, including cases of clear and
repeated refusal on the part of a State to comply with its obligations.
In addition, the Committee wishes to emphasize that its decision not to double footnote
a case which it has previously drawn to the attention of the Conference Committee in no
way implies that it has considered progress to have been made therein.
At its 76th Session (November–December 2005), the Committee decided that the
identification of cases in respect of which a government is requested to provide detailed
information to the Conference would be a two-stage process: first, the expert initially
responsible for a particular group of Conventions recommends to the Committee the
insertion of special notes; second, in light of all the recommendations made, the
Committee will, after discussion, take a final, collegial decision once it has reviewed the
application of all the Conventions.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
Appendix 2
Criteria developed by the Committee of Experts for identifying cases of progress
Excerpts of the General Report of the Committee of Experts (ILC.111/III(A))
Following its examination of the reports supplied by governments, and in accordance
with its standard practice, the Committee refers in its comments to cases in which it
expresses its satisfaction or interest at the progress achieved in the application of the
respective Conventions. The Committee wishes to emphasize that progress by Member
States is a valuable aspect of its review under the supervisory system and is cognisant
of the need to continue to address these matters in its Subcommittee on working
methods.
At its 80th and 82nd Sessions (2009 and 2011), the Committee made the following
clarifications on the general approach developed over the years for the identification of
cases of progress:
The expression by the Committee of interest or satisfaction does not mean that it
considers that the country in question is in general conformity with the Convention,
and in the same comment the Committee may express its satisfaction or
interest at a specific issue while also expressing regret concerning other
important matters which, in its view, have not been addressed in a satisfactory
manner.
The Committee wishes to emphasize that an indication of progress is limited to
a specific issue related to the application of the Convention and the nature of
the measures adopted by the government concerned.
The Committee exercises its discretion in noting progress, taking into account the
particular nature of the Convention and the specific circumstances of the country.
The expression of progress can refer to different kinds of measures relating to
national legislation, policy or practice.
If the satisfaction relates to the adoption of legislation, the Committee may also
consider appropriate follow-up measures for its practical application.
In identifying cases of progress, the Committee takes into account both the
information provided by governments in their reports and the comments of
employers’ and workers’ organizations.
Since first identifying cases of satisfaction in its report in 1964, the Committee has
continued to follow the same general criteria. The Committee expresses satisfaction in
cases in which, following comments it has made on a specific issue, governments
have taken measures through either the adoption of new legislation, an
amendment to the existing legislation or a significant change in the national policy
or practice, thus achieving fuller compliance with their obligations under the
respective Conventions. In expressing its satisfaction, the Committee indicates to
governments and the social partners that it considers the specific matter resolved. The
reason for identifying cases of satisfaction is twofold:
to place on record the Committee’s appreciation of the positive action taken by
governments in response to its comments; and
to provide an example to other governments and social partners which have to
address similar issues.
Within cases of progress, the distinction between cases of satisfaction and cases of
interest was formalized in 1979. In general, cases of interest cover measures that are
sufficiently advanced to justify the expectation that further progress would be
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
achieved in the future and regarding which the Committee would want to continue
its dialogue with the government and the social partners. The Committee’s practice
has developed to such an extent that cases in which it expresses interest may
encompass a variety of measures. The paramount consideration is that the measures
contribute to the overall achievement of the objectives of a particular Convention. This
may include:
draft legislation that is before parliament, or other proposed legislative changes
forwarded or available to the Committee;
consultations within the government and with the social partners;
new policies;
the development and implementation of activities within the framework of a
technical cooperation project or following technical assistance or advice from the
Office;
judicial decisions, according to the level of the court, the subject matter and the
force of such decisions in a particular legal system, would normally be considered
as cases of interest unless there is a compelling reason to note a particular judicial
decision as a case of satisfaction; or
the Committee may also note as cases of interest the progress made by a state,
province or territory in the framework of a federal system.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
Appendix 3
Procedure for amendments to verbatim draft minutes
This note provides information on the new procedure for amendments to verbatim draft
minutes referred to in Part VIII of this document. It should be noted that each intervention is
reflected in extenso in the verbatim draft minute only in the working language used or chosen
by the delegate for this purpose 1 (English, French or Spanish). The verbatim draft minutes will
be made available online on the Committee’s dedicated web page.
It is recalled that the Committee’s practice is to accept amendments to the verbatim draft
minutes of previous sittings prior to their adoption by the Committee. The time available to
delegates to submit amendments to the verbatim draft minutes will be clearly indicated by the
Chairperson when the verbatim draft minutes are made available to the Committee.
To the extent that the discussions are reproduced in extenso in the form of verbatim draft
minutes, the amendments will be limited exclusively to the elimination of transcription errors.
Delegates should submit their amendments to the secretariat electronically in “track
in track changes, delegates are invited to request the “Word version” of the verbatim minutes
by sending an email to the address above.
Amendments will be received only if they are sent from the email address which will
have been provided by the delegate concerned when requesting the floor. The secretariat will
acknowledge receipt of the amendment and may contact the delegate concerned when the
request does not fulfil the requirements contained in Part VIII. Delegates should specify the
verbatim draft minute concerned and make clearly visible the changes they wish to make.
When filling in a request for the floor, delegates will be requested to indicate in which working language (English, French or
Spanish) their intervention should be reflected in the verbatim draft minute, if this intervention is not in one of these three
languages. They will also be requested to provide an email address and a phone number.
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I
Annex II
? ILC.111/Record No. 4A/P.I