Burma/Myanmar at the ILO Governing Body,
The ILO Governing Body today
reactivated the “measures” contained in the International Labour Conference (ILC)
resolution of June 2000.
In fact, as the Conclusions of
today’s meeting state, the measures have never ceased
to be in force. The “reactivation” consisted in affirming that no adequate
moves have been taken by the Burmese military regime (the “Government” of
The ILO press release (Document
1, below) helps to clarify the Conclusions, Document 2, and the ILC 2000
resolution (Document 3) sets out the “measures”. Document 4 consists of links to the ILO
reports submitted to the March 2005 session of the Governing Body, its
Conclusions, and the ILO section of the Online Burma/Myanmar Library.
Document 1
ILO Press Release,
*******************
Regarding the forced labour situation in Myanmar, the
Governing Body discussed reports prepared by the ILO liaison officer a.i in
Yangon a very High-Level Team (vHLT) appointed by the Director-General of the
ILO which visited Myanmar 21-23 February. The mission comprised Sir Ninian Stephen, former Governor General of
The consensus conclusions adopted at the end of the
discussions noted that many delegates shared a sense of "condemnation over
the failure of the highest-level authorities of Myanmar to take advantage of
the unique opportunity that the visit of the vHLT represented to resume a
credible dialogue on the issues of concern, and also the feelings of grave
concern over the general situation that this reveals." While noting that
some developments in
Although the Government of Myanmar stated that the political will to address forced labour existed, the Governing Body expressed grave doubts about the credibility of these statements due to the attitude adopted by the authorities towards the vHLT and recent comments by Government officials reported in the press.
The Governing Body noted that in the circumstances and at
this stage it was widely felt that the "wait-and-see" attitude which
has prevailed since 2001 can no longer continue. It unanimously decided to
transmit its consensus conclusions to the Governments, Employers and Workers
representatives, as well as other international organizations, with a view to
them taking the appropriate action in the framework of the 2000 resolution.
(The resolution adopted in 2000 under Article 33 of the ILO Constitution calls
on ILO constituents and other agencies to review their relations with
However, the Governing Body insisted that the door was still
open for the positive developments that had been requested, and that any such
developments should be objectively taken into account as part of any review of
relations with
Document 2
The easiest
and most pleasant part of my task is to convey on our joint behalf our sincere
gratitude to the members of the very High-Level Team (vHLT) for having accepted
a very difficult assignment and for their dedication in discharging it
scrupulously both in letter and spirit. Now comes a much more painful and
difficult task, and I am indebted to my colleagues the Officers for having
given me their support and advice.
In drawing
the conclusions of the present debate it is important to recall the conclusions
reached by the Governing Body at its previous session, which set the parameters
for our present consideration of the matter. Following recent leadership
changes, the main preoccupation of the Governing Body in establishing the vHLT
was to have an objective basis to evaluate the attitude and the real will of
the authorities at the highest level, and their determination to continue their
effective cooperation on the outstanding issues; this evaluation would then
enable the Governing Body to draw the appropriate consequences in full
knowledge of the facts, including as regards action under article 33.
In that
framework, after hearing the message from the Ambassador, Mr. Nyunt Maung Shein, we have had a broad debate.
The most
largely shared sentiment was one of condemnation over the failure of the
highest authorities to take advantage of the unique opportunity that the visit
of the vHLT represented to resume a credible dialogue on the issues of concern,
and also the feelings of grave concern over the general situation that this
reveals.
Indeed, the
Prime Minister’s indications to the Members of the vHLT as well as the comments
of the Ambassador allege that the that the necessary
political will exists. However, the attitude towards the vHLT, along with the
press conference held in
Apart from
the assurances and indications, there are the facts. Some of them seem to a
number of us to go in the right direction, in particular the prosecutions and
punishment of authorities responsible for having recourse to forced labour and
the establishment of a focal point in the army on the initiative of the
Vice-Senior General.
But in the
circumstances the overall assessment falls far short of our expectations. And
this is the reason why, according to the Workers’ proposal, joined by certain governments,
the Governing Body has no other choice but to ask the Office to take a certain
number of formal steps to strengthen the measures under the resolution of June
2000, but also at the same time to strengthen the Liaison Office.
Other
Government members and the Employers’, while sharing the same sense of condemnation
of the actions of the authorities, were in view of the closeness of the
International Labour Conference starting 31 May inclined to test, for the last
time, the true will of the authorities to cooperate with the ILO, before
resuming the examination of these measures and taking a decision on them. Other
governments limited themselves to calling for an urgent restarting of an
effective and meaningful dialogue, without reference to specific measures.
In the
treatment of this particularly difficult case, the solidarity of all the groups
has always given strength to the position of the ILO. It is the view of my
colleagues and myself that this strength should be
maintained. Three considerations may help us.
- First, the question is not strictly
speaking for us to adopt new measures under article 33. These measures have
already been taken under the resolution adopted by the Conference in 2000,
which is binding on the Governing Body and the other organs of the ILO as long
as it has not been modified. These measures clearly remain in force with regard
to all constituents and others to whom the resolution is addressed.
- The next question is whether it is
time for Members to resume their consideration of the action which they have
been and still are called upon to take under the resolution of June 2000. This
question arises because most of them have suspended their action since the
beginning of 2001 as a result of the progress which seemed to be under way at
the time, and which resulted in certain concrete developments in particular
through the ILO presence. At this stage, and on the basis of the information at
our disposal, the growing feeling is that the “wait-and-see” attitude that
prevailed among Members, following the initiation of meaningful dialogue since
2001, appears to have lost its raison d’être and cannot continue.
- A third consideration is that under
the resolution the ILO cannot prejudge the action which each individual Member
may find it appropriate to take as a result of their review; the only thing
which is expected from all of them is to report at suitable intervals to
explain what they have done and why.
At the same
time it is clear that the ILO is not closing the door to the resumption of a positive
dialogue with the Myanmar authorities in line with the views wisely expressed
by the vHLT and a large number of those who took the floor during the debate;
it is clear in particular that the existence of such dialogue and the concrete
results it could produce should be taken objectively into account by Members
when deciding the outcome of their review. The extent to which progress will be
achieved with regard to the strengthening of the ILO presence as well as the
other items covered by the vHLT’s aide-mémoire,
including the immediate release of Shwe Mahn, should
be a concrete test in this regard.
In the
light of these considerations, the conclusions that myself and my colleagues
think the Governing Body could unanimously agree on taking is to transmit to
all those to whom the 2000 resolution was addressed—including relevant
agencies—the results of our deliberations reflected in the present conclusions,
with a view to them taking the appropriate action resulting from the above
considerations.
The
Officers of the Governing Body are mandated to closely follow any developments.
These developments will be the subject of a document before the Committee on
the Application of Standards of International Labour Conference in June.
Document 3
Resolution adopted by the
International Labour Conference
in June 2000
The International Labour Conference,
Meeting at its 88th Session in
Considering the proposals by the Governing Body which are before it, under the eighth item of its agenda (Provisional Record No. 4), with a view to the adoption, under article 33 of the ILO Constitution, of action to secure compliance with the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry established to examine the observance by Myanmar of its obligations in respect of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29),
Having taken note of the additional information contained in the report of the ILO technical cooperation mission sent to Yangon from 23 to 27 May 2000 (Provisional Record No. 8) and, in particular, of the letter dated 27 May 2000 from the Minister of Labour to the Director-General, which resulted from the mission,
Considering that, while this letter contains aspects which seem to reflect a welcome intention on the part of the Myanmar authorities to take measures to give effect to the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry, the factual situation on which the recommendations of the Governing Body were based has nevertheless remained unchanged to date,
Believing that the Conference cannot, without failing in its responsibilities to the workers subjected to various forms of forced or compulsory labour, abstain from the immediate application of the measures recommended by the Governing Body unless the Myanmar authorities promptly take concrete action to adopt the necessary framework for implementing the Commission of Inquiry's recommendations, thereby ensuring that the situation of the said workers will be remedied more expeditiously and under more satisfactory conditions for all concerned;
1. Approves in principle, subject to the conditions stated in paragraph 2 below, the actions recommended by the Governing Body, namely:
(a) to decide that the question of the implementation of the Commission of Inquiry's recommendations and of the application of Convention No. 29 by Myanmar should be discussed at future sessions of the International Labour Conference, at a sitting of the Committee on the Application of Standards specially set aside for the purpose, so long as this Member has not been shown to have fulfilled its obligations;
(b) to recommend to the Organization's constituents as a whole – governments, employers and workers – that they: (i) review, in the light of the conclusions of the Commission of Inquiry, the relations that they may have with the member State concerned and take appropriate measures to ensure that the said Member cannot take advantage of such relations to perpetuate or extend the system of forced or compulsory labour referred to by the Commission of Inquiry, and to contribute as far as possible to the implementation of its recommendations; and (ii) report back in due course and at appropriate intervals to the Governing Body;
(c) as regards international organizations, to invite the Director-General: (i) to inform the international organizations referred to in article 12, paragraph 1, of the Constitution of the Member's failure to comply; (ii) to call on the relevant bodies of these organizations to reconsider, within their terms of reference and in the light of the conclusions of the Commission of Inquiry, any cooperation they may be engaged in with the Member concerned and, if appropriate, to cease as soon as possible any activity that could have the effect of directly or indirectly abetting the practice of forced or compulsory labour;
(d) regarding the United Nations specifically, to invite the Director-General to request the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) to place an item on the agenda of its July 2001 session concerning the failure of Myanmar to implement the recommendations contained in the report of the Commission of Inquiry and seeking the adoption of recommendations directed by ECOSOC or by the General Assembly, or by both, to governments and to other specialized agencies and including requests similar to those proposed in paragraphs (b) and (c) above;
(e) to invite the Director-General to submit to the Governing Body, in the appropriate manner and at suitable intervals, a periodic report on the outcome of the measures set out in paragraphs (c) and (d) above, and to inform the international organizations concerned of any developments in the implementation by Myanmar of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry;
2. Decides that those measures will take effect on 30 November 2000 unless, before that date, the Governing Body is satisfied that the intentions expressed by the Minister of Labour of Myanmar in his letter dated 27 May have been translated into a framework of legislative, executive and administrative measures that are sufficiently concrete and detailed to demonstrate that the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry have been fulfilled and therefore render the implementation of one or more of these measures inappropriate;
3. Authorizes the Director-General to respond positively to all requests by Myanmar that are made with the sole purpose of establishing, before the above deadline, the framework mentioned in the conclusions of the ILO technical cooperation mission (points (i), (ii) and (iii), page 8/11 of Provisional Record No. 8), supported by a sustained ILO presence on the spot if the Governing Body confirms that the conditions are met for such presence to be truly useful and effective.
Document
4
ILO Governing Body March 2005
Links to documents
http://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/relm/gb/docs/gb292/pdf/gb-7-1.pdf
Report of the Liaison
Officer ad interim
http://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/relm/gb/docs/gb292/pdf/gb-7-2.pdf
Report of the Liaison
Officer ad interim (Addendum)
http://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/relm/gb/docs/gb292/pdf/gb-7-2-ad.pdf
Report of the very
High Level Team
http://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/relm/gb/docs/gb292/pdf/gb-7-3.pdf
GB March 2005
(292nd session) Myanmar debate - Conclusions
http://www.ibiblio.org/obl/docs3/GB292-Conclusions.htm
The Burmese
Ambassador's statement to the ILO GB on the
http://myanmargeneva.org/statemnt/prstment/statement_292ILOGB25Mar05.htm
URL of the ILO
section of the Online Burma/Myanmar Library
http://www.burmalibrary.org/show.php?cat=827&lo=d&sl=0