[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index ][Thread Index ]

ILO REPORT ON BURMA 99-05-21 (1/4)



--=====================_42688235==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"


INTERNATIONAL LABOUR OFFICE
                                                                             
Geneva, 21 May 1999

Report of the Director-General to the members of the Governing Body on

Measures taken by the Government of Myanmar following the recommendations of
the Commission of Inquiry established to examine its observance of the Forced
Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29)

THE REPORT IS ALSO ON THE ILO WEBSITE AT

http://www.ilo.org/public/english/20gb/docs/gb274/dg-myanm.htm


THIS REPORT IS DIVIDED INTO 4 SLICES FOR EASY DOWNLOADING.

SLICE 1

Introduction

1. At its 274th Session (March 1999), the Governing Body decided:

     (a) to request the Director-General to inform the members of the Governing
Body, by means of a written report, on or before 21 May 1999, regarding
measures which the Government of Myanmar has taken to comply with the
recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry, together with details of any
technical assistance requested or provided;

     (b) to request the Director-General, in preparing the abovementioned
report, to take into account any comments by the Government of Myanmar, as well
as information from workers' and employers' organizations and from other
reliable sources:

     (c) and immediately thereafter:  
(i) to request the Director-General to disseminate the findings and conclusions
of the Commission of Inquiry throughout the UN system and include in the
abovementioned report any responses received; and

(ii) to place on the agenda of the 276th Session of the Governing Body an item
entitled: "Measures including recommendations under article 33 of the ILO
Constitution, to secure compliance by the Government of Myanmar with the
recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry."(1)  
2. By letter of 1 April 1999, referring to the decision made by the Governing
Body at its 274th Session (March 1999), the Director-General of the ILO asked
the Government of Myanmar to inform him in detail, by 3 May 1999 at the latest,
of any measures taken by the Government on each of the recommendations set out
in paragraphs 539 and 540 of the Commission of Inquiry's report. In reply, the
Government sent two letters, dated 12 and 18 May 1999, which are reproduced as
Appendices 1 and 2.

3. Requests for any available information on the effect given by the Government
of Myanmar to the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry were also sent
to international employers' and workers' organizations having consultative
status with the ILO, to a number of intergovernmental organizations and to
governments of member States of the ILO. By 20 May 1999, replies had been
received from the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, the World
Confederation of Labour, the Confederation of Finnish Industry and Employers,
the Food and Agricultural Organization, the International Maritime
Organization, the International Monetary Fund, the United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees, the United Nations Industrial Development
Organization, the Universal Postal Union, the World Bank, the Governments of
Bulgaria, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, El Salvador, India, Indonesia, Italy,
Morocco, Peru, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States. 

4. In its report,(2)  communicated to the Government of Myanmar on 27 July
1998, the Commission of Inquiry established to examine the observance of the
Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), concluded that: 

 ... the obligation under Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Convention to suppress
the use of forced or compulsory labour is violated in Myanmar in national law,
in particular by the Village Act and the Towns Act, as well as in actual
practice in a widespread and systematic manner, with total disregard for the
human dignity, safety and health and basic needs of the people of Myanmar.

Concurrently, the Government violates its obligation under Article 25 of the
Convention to ensure that the penalties imposed by law for the illegal exaction
of forced or compulsory labour are both really adequate and strictly
enforced.(3)  

5. "In view of the Government's flagrant and persistent failure to comply with
the Convention", the Commission in its recommendations urged the Government to
take the necessary steps to ensure:

(a) that the relevant legislative texts, in particular the Village Act and the
Towns Act, be brought into line with the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No.
29), as already requested by the Committee of Experts on the Application of 
Conventions and Recommendations and promised by the Government for over 30
years, and again announced in the Government's observations on the complaint.
This should be done without further delay and completed at the very latest by 1
May 1999;

(b) that in actual practice, no more forced or compulsory labour be imposed by
the authorities, in particular the military. This is all the more important
since the powers to impose compulsory labour appear to be taken for granted,
without any reference to the Village Act or Towns Act. Thus, besides amending
the legislation, concrete action needs to be taken  immediately for each and
every of the many fields of forced labour examined in Chapters 12 and 13 [of
the Commission's report] to stop the present practice. This must not be done by
secret directives, which are against the rule of law and have been ineffective,
but through public acts of the Executive promulgated and made known to all
levels of the military and to the whole population. Also, action must not be
limited to the issue of wage payment; it must ensure that nobody is compelled
to work against his or her will. Nonetheless, the budgeting of adequate means
to hire free wage labour for the public activities which are today based on
forced and unpaid labour is also required;

(c) that the penalties which may be imposed under section 374 of the Penal Code
for the exaction of forced or compulsory labour be strictly enforced, in
conformity with Article 25 of the Convention. This requires thorough
investigation, prosecution and adequate punishment of those found guilty. As
pointed out in 1994 by the Governing Body committee set up to consider the
representation made by the ICFTU under article 24 of the ILO Constitution,
alleging non-observance by Myanmar of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No.
29), the penal prosecution of those resorting to coercion appeared all the more
important since the blurring of the borderline between compulsory and voluntary
labour, recurrent throughout the Government's statements to the committee, was
all the more likely to occur in actual recruitment by local or military
officials. The power to impose compulsory labour will not cease to be taken for
granted unless those used to exercising it are actually brought to face
criminal responsibility.(4) 

6. The Commission of Inquiry pointed out that its recommendations "require
action to be taken by the Government of Myanmar without delay".(5) 

7. Information received on the effect given to the recommendations of the
Commission of Inquiry will be set out in three parts, dealing with: (i) the
amendment of legislation; (ii) the exaction in practice of forced or compulsory
labour, and any measures taken by the Government to stop the practice; and
(iii) the enforcement of penalties which may be imposed under the Penal Code
for the exaction of forced or compulsory labour. 


                                   I. Amendment of legislation

8. In its report, the Commission of Inquiry noted:

 ... that section 11(d), read together with section 8(1)(g), (n) and (o) of the
Village Act, as well as section 9(b) of the Towns Act provide for the exaction
of work or services from any person residing in a village tract or in a town
ward, that is, work or services for which the said person has not offered
himself or herself voluntarily, and that failure to comply with a requisition
made under section 11(d) of the Village Act or section 9(b) of the Towns Act is
punishable with penal sanctions under section 12 of the Village Act or section
9(a) of the Towns Act. Thus, these Acts provide for the exaction of "forced or
compulsory labour" within the definition of Article 2(1) of the Convention.(6) 


The Commission further noted that the wide powers to requisition labour and
services under these provisions do not come under any of the exceptions listed
in Article 2, paragraph 2, of the Convention and are entirely incompatible with
the Convention.(7)  Recalling that the amendment of these provisions had been
promised by the Government for over 30 years and again announced in the
Government's observations on the complaint, the Commission urged the Government
to take the necessary steps to ensure that the Village Act and the Towns Act be
brought into line with the Convention without further delay, and at the very
latest by 1 May 1999.(8) 

9. In reply to the request to report on any measures taken on each of the
recommendations set out in paragraphs 539 and 540 of the report of the
Commission of Inquiry, the Government stated, in its letter dated 12 May
1999,(9)  "that the practical measures envisaged to be taken on the
recommendations have been submitted to the Government of the Union of Myanmar
for decision and they are already in the process of being actively considered
by the high authorities". No indication was given regarding the nature of the
"practical measures envisaged to be taken". In its preceding letter of 18
February 1999, again referred to in this connection, the Government recalled:

 ... that as per ILO recommendations to bring the relevant articles of the
existing Village Act and the Towns Act in line with the ILO Convention 29 and
for the Village Act and the Towns Act to be in accord with the present
conditions prevailing in the country, a Working Group at the senior official
level and a Ministerial Committee are now actively engaged in a review process.

It is a long-standing practice in Myanmar that any law that is enacted in the
country is widely published for the information of the general public. Once
this process has been completed and when the law is promulgated, it will
accordingly be widely published to make it known to the public at large.

10. By letter of 18 May 1999,(10)  the Government indicated: 

 ... that the Ministry of Home Affairs of the Government of the Union of
Myanmar, has issued an Order dated 14 May 999, in which the relevant
authorities were directed not to exercise the powers conferred on them under
the Provisions namely, Section 7 Sub-section (1)(l) and (m), and Section 9 and
9(A) of the Towns Act, 1907, and also Section 8 Sub-section (l)(g), (n) and
(o), Section 11(d) and Section 12 of the Village Act, 1907.

The Government added "that this Order clearly stipulated that any person who
fails to abide by this Order shall have action taken against him under the
existing law". Finally, the Government pointed out that the Order has already
been made public and has been circulated to all state bodies, government
ministries and all local administrative bodies and will be published in the
Myanmar National Gazette where all laws, procedures, notifications, regulations
and directives are published, and that it was made known to local and
international media at the conclusion of the ASEAN Labour Ministerial Meeting
in Yangon on 15 May 1999.

11. Thus, by 18 May 1999, neither the Village Act nor the Towns Act had been
amended, as requested in the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry, nor
had any draft law proposed or under consideration for that purpose been brought
to the knowledge of the ILO. However, an Order "not to exercise the powers"
under the Acts has been announced by  the Government in its letter of 18 May
1999. The text of the Order made on 14 May 1999, which was not included in the
Government's letter, is reproduced as Appendix III and will be considered in
Part II.B. below.

12. In a communication of 3 May 1999, the Government of the United States
indicated that it:  
 ... is aware of no evidence which would demonstrate that the SPDC(11)  has, or
intends to, abrogate the provisions of the Towns and Village Acts which provide
the legal (sic) basis for the forced labor policies. The USG understands that
the SPDC recently decided, in fact, to continue its practice of forced labor
and porterage, because it determined it could not afford to pay for the
services now forcibly requisitioned.











II. The exaction in practice of forced and compulsory 
labour and any measures taken to stop it

13. This part of the report will set out information regarding: (a) the
continued exaction of forced or compulsory labour by the authorities; and (b)
any measures taken to stop the practice.


A. Continued exaction of forced or compulsory labour by the authorities

14. In its recommendations of July 1998, the Commission of Inquiry pointed out
that "concrete action needs to be taken immediately" by the Government "for
each and every of the many fields of forced labour examined in Chapters 12 and
13" of the Commission's report to stop the present practice.(12) 

15. In its letters to the Director-General of the ILO dated 12 and 18 May
1999,(13)  the Government of Myanmar did not refer to actual practice followed
since the Commission of Inquiry issued its recommendations. 

16. All information on actual practice that was received by the
Director-General in reply to his request notes the continued widespread use of
forced labour by the authorities, in particular by the military. Information
received on the general pattern observed will be reflected in section (1) below
before dealing under (2) with specific forms of labour and services as
identified by the Commission of Inquiry in paragraphs 300-461 and 485-502 of
its report.


(1) General observations

17. In its communication of 3 May 1999, the ICFTU draws attention to "relevant
and consistent evidence of the persistence of forced labour in Burma" contained
in documents from the following sources: Federation of Trade Unions -- Burma
(FTUB), United Nations, Anti-Slavery International, Worldview International
Foundation, Aliran Kasadaran Negara, Karen Human Rights Group, Images Asia,
Shan Human Rights Foundation, Human Rights Foundation of Monland, Mon
Information Service, Chin Human Rights Organization, Karenni Information
Office, State Department of the Government of the United States, National
League for Democracy (Burma) and Committee Representing the People's Parliament
(Burma).


18. The ICFTU notes that:

Ever since the Commission of Inquiry's report was published, the ICFTU has
continued to receive a wealth of relevant and consistent information, similar
to that submitted to the Commission of Inquiry during its investigation. These
reports demonstrate conclusively that the authorities of the country concerned
have systematically continued, in the period since the Commission of Inquiry
published its Report up to the time of writing, to impose forced labour in a
widespread and systematic fashion. Neither have the authorities desisted in the
least from carrying out or from condoning all the practices identified in the
report of the Commission as occurring systematically in the context of forced
labour, including arbitrary detention and imprisonment, extortion, torture,
rape, arbitrary and extra-judiciary executions and other grave violations of
fundamental human rights.


19. The ICFTU draws particular attention to:

 ... documents provided by the Karen Human Rights Group (KHRG) which contain
copies of several hundred written, official orders from either the army or the
representatives of the administration, demanding that village heads in Pa'an,
Toungoo, Dooplaya and Papun Districts provide villagers in order to perform
forced labour as porters, messengers and road labourers, or work at army camps,
as well as orders demanding that said villages provide building materials,
equipment, food and money to various military or civilian administration units.


As pointed out by the ICFTU, "all these orders are quasi-identical in shape,
style and contents to the hundreds of forced labour orders which the Commission
of Inquiry had examined and found to be authentic in the course of its
investigation". 

20. Like the earlier orders, those issued after July 1998 never refer to any
legal basis for the authority exercised. Thus, the observation of the
Commission of Inquiry that "the powers to impose compulsory labour appear to be
taken for granted, without any reference to the Village Act or Towns Act"(14) 
remains valid. 

21. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees supplied a note dated 29
April 1999 on compulsory labour practices in Northern Rakhine State, Myanmar,
where UNHCR has been operational since 1994 around the areas of Maungdaw,
Rathedaung and Buthidaung. According to this note:

It is UNHCR's observation that, due in part to its advocacy efforts, there has
been a decreasing trend in compulsory labour practices over the past year.
There has been improvement to the situation in terms of the frequency of labour
calls, the number of labourers required as well as the number of days of
labour. There also appears to have been more attempts made to pay labourers for
their work in money or in kind, although the amounts paid are usually meagre
and far below market rate.

     Nonetheless, compulsory labour practices have continued to occur. The
following are some observations:   
* Compulsory labour practices are found to vary from areas to areas according
to the local personalities of the authorities in charge. In some areas, the
authorities do not permit compulsory labour or impose a temporary halt to the
use of compulsory labour, while in some others, recourse is often made to
compulsory labour to undertake menial jobs. 
           
* Compulsory labour is usually exacted by the border immigration authorities
(NASAKA), by the local civil authorities (the "Village Peace and Development
Council" also known as the "VPDC" and the "District Peace and Development
Council" also known as the "DPDC") and the military. 

* It appears that compulsory labour practices are particularly common in remote
areas, such as in Buthidaung North, as well as in areas near military
establishments/camps. 

* Compulsory labour is commonly used for crop harvesting in farms belonging to
the authorities, for domestic work in the compounds of the authorities and in
portering for the military. On a few occasions recently, there have also been
calls for labour in the construction of agricultural dams. 

* It is reported that while labourers are usually not harassed or ill-treated
during work, nonetheless, they are not provided with food and, in some
instances, supervised by armed personnel. It has also been reported recently,
that on one occasion, failure by some villagers to abide by labour calls have
resulted in their arrest by the authorities. 
     UNHCR has also received information that in order to reduce disruptions in
adults' income-earning activities, families have resorted to sending children
to perform labour in place of adult members of the families. 

END OF SLICE 1

Internet ProLink PC User

--=====================_42688235==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html>
<font size=3D4><div align=3D"center">
INTERNATIONAL LABOUR OFFICE<br>
</div>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbs=
p;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&n=
bsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbs=
p;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&n=
bsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<br>
Geneva, 21 May 1999<br>
<br>
Report of the Director-General to the members of the Governing Body
on<br>
<br>
Measures taken by the Government of Myanmar following the recommendations
of the Commission of Inquiry established to examine its observance of the
Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29)<br>
<br>
THE REPORT IS ALSO ON THE ILO WEBSITE AT<br>
<br>
</font><font color=3D"#0000FF"><u><a=
 href=3D"http://www.ilo.org/public/english/20gb/docs/gb274/dg-myanm.htm"=
 eudora=3D"autourl">http://www.ilo.org/public/english/20gb/docs/gb274/dg-mya=
nm.htm</a><br>
<br>
<br>
</font></u><font size=3D4>THIS REPORT IS DIVIDED INTO 4 SLICES FOR EASY
DOWNLOADING.<br>
<br>
SLICE 1<br>
<br>
Introduction<br>
<br>
1. At its 274th Session (March 1999), the Governing Body decided:<br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; (a) to request the Director-General to inform
the members of the Governing Body, by means of a written report, on or
before 21 May 1999, regarding measures which the Government of Myanmar
has taken to comply with the recommendations of the Commission of
Inquiry, together with details of any technical assistance requested or
provided;<br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; (b) to request the Director-General, in
preparing the abovementioned report, to take into account any comments by
the Government of Myanmar, as well as information from workers' and
employers' organizations and from other reliable sources:<br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; (c) and immediately thereafter:=20
<dl>
<dd>(i) to request the Director-General to disseminate the findings and
conclusions of the Commission of Inquiry throughout the UN system and
include in the abovementioned report any responses received; and<br>
<br>

<dd>(ii) to place on the agenda of the 276th Session of the Governing
Body an item entitled: &quot;Measures including recommendations under
article 33 of the ILO Constitution, to secure compliance by the
Government of Myanmar with the recommendations of the Commission of
Inquiry.&quot;(1)&nbsp;=20
</dl>2. By letter of 1 April 1999, referring to the decision made by the
Governing Body at its 274th Session (March 1999), the Director-General of
the ILO asked the Government of Myanmar to inform him in detail, by 3 May
1999 at the latest, of any measures taken by the Government on each of
the recommendations set out in paragraphs 539 and 540 of the Commission
of Inquiry's report. In reply, the Government sent two letters, dated 12
and 18 May 1999, which are reproduced as Appendices 1 and 2.<br>
<br>
3. Requests for any available information on the effect given by the
Government of Myanmar to the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry
were also sent to international employers' and workers' organizations
having consultative status with the ILO, to a number of intergovernmental
organizations and to governments of member States of the ILO. By 20 May
1999, replies had been received from the International Confederation of
Free Trade Unions, the World Confederation of Labour, the Confederation
of Finnish Industry and Employers, the Food and Agricultural
Organization, the International Maritime Organization, the International
Monetary Fund, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the
United Nations Industrial Development Organization, the Universal Postal
Union, the World Bank, the Governments of Bulgaria, Colombia, Costa Rica,
Croatia, El Salvador, India, Indonesia, Italy, Morocco, Peru, Sweden, the
United Kingdom and the United States. <br>
<br>
4. In its report,(2)&nbsp; communicated to the Government of Myanmar on
27 July 1998, the Commission of Inquiry established to examine the
observance of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), concluded
that: <br>
<br>
 ... the obligation under Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Convention to
suppress the use of forced or compulsory labour is violated in Myanmar in
national law, in particular by the Village Act and the Towns Act, as well
as in actual practice in a widespread and systematic manner, with total
disregard for the human dignity, safety and health and basic needs of the
people of Myanmar.<br>
<br>
Concurrently, the Government violates its obligation under Article 25 of
the Convention to ensure that the penalties imposed by law for the
illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour are both really adequate
and strictly enforced.(3)&nbsp; <br>
<br>
5. &quot;In view of the Government's flagrant and persistent failure to
comply with the Convention&quot;, the Commission in its recommendations
urged the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure:<br>
<br>
(a) that the relevant legislative texts, in particular the Village Act
and the Towns Act, be brought into line with the Forced Labour
Convention, 1930 (No. 29), as already requested by the Committee of
Experts on the Application of&nbsp; Conventions and Recommendations and
promised by the Government for over 30 years, and again announced in the
Government's observations on the complaint. This should be done without
further delay and completed at the very latest by 1 May 1999;<br>
<br>
(b) that in actual practice, no more forced or compulsory labour be
imposed by the authorities, in particular the military. This is all the
more important since the powers to impose compulsory labour appear to be
taken for granted, without any reference to the Village Act or Towns Act.
Thus, besides amending the legislation, concrete action needs to be
taken&nbsp; immediately for each and every of the many fields of forced
labour examined in Chapters 12 and 13 [of the Commission's report] to
stop the present practice. This must not be done by secret directives,
which are against the rule of law and have been ineffective, but through
public acts of the Executive promulgated and made known to all levels of
the military and to the whole population. Also, action must not be
limited to the issue of wage payment; it must ensure that nobody is
compelled to work against his or her will. Nonetheless, the budgeting of
adequate means to hire free wage labour for the public activities which
are today based on forced and unpaid labour is also required;<br>
<br>
(c) that the penalties which may be imposed under section 374 of the
Penal Code for the exaction of forced or compulsory labour be strictly
enforced, in conformity with Article 25 of the Convention. This requires
thorough investigation, prosecution and adequate punishment of those
found guilty. As pointed out in 1994 by the Governing Body committee set
up to consider the representation made by the ICFTU under article 24 of
the ILO Constitution, alleging non-observance by Myanmar of the Forced
Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), the penal prosecution of those
resorting to coercion appeared all the more important since the blurring
of the borderline between compulsory and voluntary labour, recurrent
throughout the Government's statements to the committee, was all the more
likely to occur in actual recruitment by local or military officials. The
power to impose compulsory labour will not cease to be taken for granted
unless those used to exercising it are actually brought to face criminal
responsibility.(4) <br>
<br>
6. The Commission of Inquiry pointed out that its recommendations
&quot;require action to be taken by the Government of Myanmar without
delay&quot;.(5) <br>
<br>
7. Information received on the effect given to the recommendations of the
Commission of Inquiry will be set out in three parts, dealing with: (i)
the amendment of legislation; (ii) the exaction in practice of forced or
compulsory labour, and any measures taken by the Government to stop the
practice; and (iii) the enforcement of penalties which may be imposed
under the Penal Code for the exaction of forced or compulsory labour.
<br>
<br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbs=
p;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&n=
bsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
I. Amendment of legislation<br>
<br>
8. In its report, the Commission of Inquiry noted:<br>
<br>
 ... that section 11(d), read together with section 8(1)(g), (n) and (o)
of the Village Act, as well as section 9(b) of the Towns Act provide for
the exaction of work or services from any person residing in a village
tract or in a town ward, that is, work or services for which the said
person has not offered himself or herself voluntarily, and that failure
to comply with a requisition made under section 11(d) of the Village Act
or section 9(b) of the Towns Act is punishable with penal sanctions under
section 12 of the Village Act or section 9(a) of the Towns Act. Thus,
these Acts provide for the exaction of &quot;forced or compulsory
labour&quot; within the definition of Article 2(1) of the
Convention.(6)&nbsp; <br>
<br>
The Commission further noted that the wide powers to requisition labour
and services under these provisions do not come under any of the
exceptions listed in Article 2, paragraph 2, of the Convention and are
entirely incompatible with the Convention.(7)&nbsp; Recalling that the
amendment of these provisions had been promised by the Government for
over 30 years and again announced in the Government's observations on the
complaint, the Commission urged the Government to take the necessary
steps to ensure that the Village Act and the Towns Act be brought into
line with the Convention without further delay, and at the very latest by
1 May 1999.(8) <br>
<br>
9. In reply to the request to report on any measures taken on each of the
recommendations set out in paragraphs 539 and 540 of the report of the
Commission of Inquiry, the Government stated, in its letter dated 12 May
1999,(9)&nbsp; &quot;that the practical measures envisaged to be taken on
the recommendations have been submitted to the Government of the Union of
Myanmar for decision and they are already in the process of being
actively considered by the high authorities&quot;. No indication was
given regarding the nature of the &quot;practical measures envisaged to
be taken&quot;. In its preceding letter of 18 February 1999, again
referred to in this connection, the Government recalled:<br>
<br>
 ... that as per ILO recommendations to bring the relevant articles of the
existing Village Act and the Towns Act in line with the ILO Convention 29
and for the Village Act and the Towns Act to be in accord with the
present conditions prevailing in the country, a Working Group at the
senior official level and a Ministerial Committee are now actively
engaged in a review process.<br>
<br>
It is a long-standing practice in Myanmar that any law that is enacted in
the country is widely published for the information of the general
public. Once this process has been completed and when the law is
promulgated, it will accordingly be widely published to make it known to
the public at large.<br>
<br>
10. By letter of 18 May 1999,(10)&nbsp; the Government indicated: <br>
<br>
 ... that the Ministry of Home Affairs of the Government of the Union of
Myanmar, has issued an Order dated 14 May 999, in which the relevant
authorities were directed not to exercise the powers conferred on them
under the Provisions namely, Section 7 Sub-section (1)(l) and (m), and
Section 9 and 9(A) of the Towns Act, 1907, and also Section 8 Sub-section
(l)(g), (n) and (o), Section 11(d) and Section 12 of the Village Act,
1907.<br>
<br>
The Government added &quot;that this Order clearly stipulated that any
person who fails to abide by this Order shall have action taken against
him under the existing law&quot;. Finally, the Government pointed out
that the Order has already been made public and has been circulated to
all state bodies, government ministries and all local administrative
bodies and will be published in the Myanmar National Gazette where all
laws, procedures, notifications, regulations and directives are
published, and that it was made known to local and international media at
the conclusion of the ASEAN Labour Ministerial Meeting in Yangon on 15
May 1999.<br>
<br>
11. Thus, by 18 May 1999, neither the Village Act nor the Towns Act had
been amended, as requested in the recommendations of the Commission of
Inquiry, nor had any draft law proposed or under consideration for that
purpose been brought to the knowledge of the ILO. However, an Order
&quot;not to exercise the powers&quot; under the Acts has been announced
by&nbsp; the Government in its letter of 18 May 1999. The text of the
Order made on 14 May 1999, which was not included in the Government's
letter, is reproduced as Appendix III and will be considered in Part
II.B. below.<br>
<br>
12. In a communication of 3 May 1999, the Government of the United States
indicated that it:=20
<dl>
<dd>... is aware of no evidence which would demonstrate that the
SPDC(11)&nbsp; has, or intends to, abrogate the provisions of the Towns
and Village Acts which provide the legal (sic) basis for the forced labor
policies. The USG understands that the SPDC recently decided, in fact, to
continue its practice of forced labor and porterage, because it
determined it could not afford to pay for the services now forcibly
requisitioned.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>

</dl><div align=3D"center">
II. The exaction in practice of forced and compulsory <br>
labour and any measures taken to stop it<br>
<br>
</div>
13. This part of the report will set out information regarding: (a) the
continued exaction of forced or compulsory labour by the authorities; and
(b) any measures taken to stop the practice.<br>
<br>
<br>
A. Continued exaction of forced or compulsory labour by the
authorities<br>
<br>
14. In its recommendations of July 1998, the Commission of Inquiry
pointed out that &quot;concrete action needs to be taken
immediately&quot; by the Government &quot;for each and every of the many
fields of forced labour examined in Chapters 12 and 13&quot; of the
Commission's report to stop the present practice.(12) <br>
<br>
15. In its letters to the Director-General of the ILO dated 12 and 18 May
1999,(13)&nbsp; the Government of Myanmar did not refer to actual
practice followed since the Commission of Inquiry issued its
recommendations. <br>
<br>
16. All information on actual practice that was received by the
Director-General in reply to his request notes the continued widespread
use of forced labour by the authorities, in particular by the military.
Information received on the general pattern observed will be reflected in
section (1) below before dealing under (2) with specific forms of labour
and services as identified by the Commission of Inquiry in paragraphs
300-461 and 485-502 of its report.<br>
<br>
<br>
(1) General observations<br>
<br>
17. In its communication of 3 May 1999, the ICFTU draws attention to
&quot;relevant and consistent evidence of the persistence of forced
labour in Burma&quot; contained in documents from the following sources:
Federation of Trade Unions -- Burma (FTUB), United Nations, Anti-Slavery
International, Worldview International Foundation, Aliran Kasadaran
Negara, Karen Human Rights Group, Images Asia, Shan Human Rights
Foundation, Human Rights Foundation of Monland, Mon Information Service,
Chin Human Rights Organization, Karenni Information Office, State
Department of the Government of the United States, National League for
Democracy (Burma) and Committee Representing the People's Parliament
(Burma).<br>
<br>
<br>
18. The ICFTU notes that:<br>
<br>
Ever since the Commission of Inquiry's report was published, the ICFTU
has continued to receive a wealth of relevant and consistent information,
similar to that submitted to the Commission of Inquiry during its
investigation. These reports demonstrate conclusively that the
authorities of the country concerned have systematically continued, in
the period since the Commission of Inquiry published its Report up to the
time of writing, to impose forced labour in a widespread and systematic
fashion. Neither have the authorities desisted in the least from carrying
out or from condoning all the practices identified in the report of the
Commission as occurring systematically in the context of forced labour,
including arbitrary detention and imprisonment, extortion, torture, rape,
arbitrary and extra-judiciary executions and other grave violations of
fundamental human rights.<br>
<br>
<br>
19. The ICFTU draws particular attention to:<br>
<br>
 ... documents provided by the Karen Human Rights Group (KHRG) which
contain copies of several hundred written, official orders from either
the army or the representatives of the administration, demanding that
village heads in Pa'an, Toungoo, Dooplaya and Papun Districts provide
villagers in order to perform forced labour as porters, messengers and
road labourers, or work at army camps, as well as orders demanding that
said villages provide building materials, equipment, food and money to
various military or civilian administration units. <br>
<br>
As pointed out by the ICFTU, &quot;all these orders are quasi-identical
in shape, style and contents to the hundreds of forced labour orders
which the Commission of Inquiry had examined and found to be authentic in
the course of its investigation&quot;. <br>
<br>
20. Like the earlier orders, those issued after July 1998 never refer to
any legal basis for the authority exercised. Thus, the observation of the
Commission of Inquiry that &quot;the powers to impose compulsory labour
appear to be taken for granted, without any reference to the Village Act
or Towns Act&quot;(14)&nbsp; remains valid. <br>
<br>
21. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees supplied a note
dated 29 April 1999 on compulsory labour practices in Northern Rakhine
State, Myanmar, where UNHCR has been operational since 1994 around the
areas of Maungdaw, Rathedaung and Buthidaung. According to this
note:<br>
<br>
It is UNHCR's observation that, due in part to its advocacy efforts,
there has been a decreasing trend in compulsory labour practices over the
past year. There has been improvement to the situation in terms of the
frequency of labour calls, the number of labourers required as well as
the number of days of labour. There also appears to have been more
attempts made to pay labourers for their work in money or in kind,
although the amounts paid are usually meagre and far below market
rate.<br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Nonetheless, compulsory labour practices have
continued to occur. The following are some observations:&nbsp;=20
<dl>
<dd>* Compulsory labour practices are found to vary from areas to areas
according to the local personalities of the authorities in charge. In
some areas, the authorities do not permit compulsory labour or impose a
temporary halt to the use of compulsory labour, while in some others,
recourse is often made to compulsory labour to undertake menial jobs.=20
</dl>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
<dl>
<dd>* Compulsory labour is usually exacted by the border immigration
authorities (NASAKA), by the local civil authorities (the &quot;Village
Peace and Development Council&quot; also known as the &quot;VPDC&quot;
and the &quot;District Peace and Development Council&quot; also known as
the &quot;DPDC&quot;) and the military. <br>
<br>

<dd>* It appears that compulsory labour practices are particularly common
in remote areas, such as in Buthidaung North, as well as in areas near
military establishments/camps. <br>
<br>

<dd>* Compulsory labour is commonly used for crop harvesting in farms
belonging to the authorities, for domestic work in the compounds of the
authorities and in portering for the military. On a few occasions
recently, there have also been calls for labour in the construction of
agricultural dams. <br>
<br>

<dd>* It is reported that while labourers are usually not harassed or
ill-treated during work, nonetheless, they are not provided with food
and, in some instances, supervised by armed personnel. It has also been
reported recently, that on one occasion, failure by some villagers to
abide by labour calls have resulted in their arrest by the authorities.=20
</dl>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; UNHCR has also received information that in
order to reduce disruptions in adults' income-earning activities,
families have resorted to sending children to perform labour in place of
adult members of the families. <br>
<br>
END OF SLICE 1<br>
</font><br>
<div>Internet ProLink PC User</div>
</html>

--=====================_42688235==_.ALT--