12.07.2015 Views

A Global Alliance Against Forced Labour - International Labour ...

A Global Alliance Against Forced Labour - International Labour ...

A Global Alliance Against Forced Labour - International Labour ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

A GLOBAL ALLIANCE AGAINST FORCED LABOURpeople, and to address the demand side of trafficking.Participants also agreed on the importance of datacollection in the prevention of trafficking. Finally,attention was drawn to trafficking for labour exploitationand begging, and to the particular problems oftrafficking during armed conflicts.National experience79. What significant developments have takenplace during the period under review, and what lessonsof good practice can be found? This section doesnot claim to present a detailed review of these issuesby country, but merely seeks to highlight the mostimportant ones, illustrated by selected examples.80. A study on forced labour in Africa 7 identifieda range of inadequacies in the current legal frameworkin a number of countries. Definitions are verygeneral, so that prosecutors and the courts find it difficultto identify forced labour situations in practice.Constitutional prohibitions are often not supportedby specific laws, making it extremely difficult eitherfor the authorities to bring a prosecution or for forcedlabour victims to refer a case to court. In other casesforced labour may be prohibited in a country’s labourcode but not specified in any law as a criminal offence.Separate laws may contain distinct and sometimes inconsistentdefinitions of overlapping offences, for exampleconcerning forced labour, slavery, servitude orservile status and trafficking; in such cases, nationallaws tend to reflect an assumption that forced labouris the least serious of these offences. Furthermore, theoffence of trafficking in persons is often defined inlaw as only concerning women and girls traffickedinto prostitution or other sexual exploitation.81. Some countries have recently clarified the definitionof more traditional forms of forced labour, orincreased the penalties for forcing someone to work.For example, Niger’s 2003 law amending the PenalCode 8 specifically addresses the predicament of personswhose ancestors were enslaved and who are describedas still being of “servile status”. The amendedlaw also clarified the offence of debt bondage, providingfor severe penalties in the form of lengthyprison sentences and heavy fines. Mali provides severepenalties for child trafficking under its 2001 PenalCode. In Nigeria, a new 2003 anti-trafficking law 9provides for life imprisonment for slavery offences,for a series of penalties including fines for traffickingrelatedoffences involving minors under the age of 18,but for life imprisonment in the case of their importationor exportation for the purpose of prostitution.For the most part, however, penalties for the offenceof forced labour appear to be very light.82. In most African countries, where institutions ofboth labour administration and law enforcement havesevere resource limitations, the record on law enforcementis unsurprisingly weak. In Sudan, for example,although a legal framework is in place and the authoritiesnow acknowledge thousands of abductions,no one has so far been prosecuted for abductions or theoffence of forced labour. Nigeria’s new anti-traffickinglaw holds out promise of good practice. It provides fora National Agency for Prohibition of Traffic in Personsand Other Related Matters (NAPTIP) responsible fortraining law enforcement agents and others, to ensureeffective implementation. It is too early to assess theeffectiveness of this new institutional structure.83. In several South Asian countries a legal frameworkagainst bonded labour systems is now firmly inplace. Typically, as in India and Pakistan, the lawsprovide for a detailed definition of bonded labour andbonded labour systems, penal provisions for the offenceof exacting bonded labour, and modalities for enforcement.India’s Bonded <strong>Labour</strong> System (Abolition)Act, 1976 (BLSA), provides for imprisonment of up tothree years and fines of up to Rs.2,000 for anyone whocompels any person to render any bonded labour andadvances any bonded debt. Pakistan’s Bonded <strong>Labour</strong>System (Abolition) Act, 1992, provides for a penalty ofbetween two and five years’ imprisonment, or a fine ofnot less than PRs.50,000, or both, as punishment forenforcing or exacting bonded labour.84. In August 2004, the Government of India reported4,859 prosecutions to date under the BLSA, atotal that probably far exceeds that of any other singlecountry on a forced labour offence. However, it isnot known how many resulted in convictions. 10 Yetthe number of prosecutions is still low compared tothe number of bonded labourers: the Government’sown official statistics indicate that 285,379 bondedlabourers had been identified as at 31 March 2004, ofwhom 265,417 had received rehabilitation assistance. 11The remaining 19,962 persons were not available forrehabilitation as they either had died or could notbe traced. State governments report that 527 districtlevelVigilance Committees have been constituted tomonitor the situation on the ground. 12 However, thefederal Government acknowledges that there is someconfusion over what constitutes bonded labour. For7. M. Dottridge: “<strong>Forced</strong> labour in Africa: Concepts, categories and challenges” (ILO, SAP-FL Working Paper, forthcoming).8. Act No. 2003-025 of 13 June 2003, to amend Act No. 61-27 of 15 July 1961 establishing the Penal Code.9. Trafficking in Persons (Prohibition) Law Enforcement and Administration Act, 2003.10. Data are available only for the State of Uttar Pradesh, where a total of 2,421 prosecutions resulted in 1,228 convictions and 1,193 acquittals(information provided to SAP-FL by the Government of India, 31 Aug. 2004).11. ibid. The states in which bonded labourers have been released and rehabilitated are, in order of their respective numbers: Tamil Nadu,Karnataka, Orissa, Andhra Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan, which together account for 98 per cent of allrehabilitated bonded labourers. A further eight states account for the remaining 2 per cent.12. ibid.20

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!