Submitted by crinadmin on
This report summarises individual observations and direct requests issued by the ILO Committee of Experts related to child labour conventions. To view the full reports, go to the ILOLEX database (http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/) and click on 'display all documents related to a specific country'. CEACR: Observation concerning Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138) Panama (ratification: 2000) Published: 2012 Article 1 of the Convention and Part V of the report form. National policy and application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes the concerns expressed by the CS and the CGTP about the increase in the number of children working in the country during the past few years, a situation which they believe reflects the inadequacy of the measures taken by the Government to ensure the abolition of child labour. The Committee notes the Government’s reply that, according to the findings of the child labour survey of 2010, the number of children and young persons aged between 15 and 17 years engaged in economic activity has been reduced by 29,065. According to the Government, this drop in numbers is linked to the strengthening of the labour inspection services, which has led to the recruitment of 116 additional labour inspectors and the increase of inspection visits concerning child labour. The Government also states that the Bill on the protection of children and young people was approved by the National Assembly on 27 October 2011 and is waiting to be approved by the President of the Republic. Furthermore, the Committee takes due note of the detailed information in the Government’s report concerning the measures adopted to ensure the abolition of child labour. It also notes that the Government, through the Committee for the Eradication of Child Labour and the Protection of Young Workers (CETIPPAT) is pursuing a policy to eliminate child labour with a view to reaching the objectives set forth in the “Decent work in the Americas: An agenda for the Hemisphere”, i.e. to eliminate the worst forms of child labour from now until 2015 and to eliminate child labour from now until 2020. It also takes due note of the establishment, in February 2010, of the National Directorate against Child Labour and Protection of Young Workers (DIRETIPPAT), technical secretariat of the CETIPPAT, responsible in particular for supporting the elaboration and follow-up to the National Plan for the Elimination of Child Labour (2007–11). The Committee notes the statistics sent by the Government on the progress made by the DIRETIPPAT and notes with interest that 2,716 children were withdrawn from their work between 2010 and 2011. It also notes that the Government adopted the 2011–13 programme to implement the “roadmap to make Panama a country free from child labour” in March 2011. This programme is intended to be a planning tool to facilitate the elaboration of short and middle-term actions to prevent child labour and its worst forms. Its main areas of action are poverty reduction, education and health. The Committee also notes the Government’s information on the results of the Government programme of direct action for the prevention and elimination of child labour, carried out in collaboration with the non-governmental organizations FUNDESPA, Casa Esperanza and Fundación Telefónica in the nine provinces of the country. It observes that more than 1,500 children and young people engaged in child labour benefited from this programme in 2011. Finally, the Committee notes the findings of the third national survey on child labour enclosed with the Government’s report, which, in addition to indicating the reduction in the number of working children aged 5 to 17 years who are working (which has dropped from 89,767 to 60,702), shows that children and young people mainly work in the agricultural sector, forestry, fishing, hunting and as itinerant traders. The majority of these children work in rural areas and come from indigenous communities. Furthermore, girls are more affected by child labour (75 per cent of girls recorded as opposed to 25 per cent of boys). Article 3(3). Authorization to employ young persons from the age of 16 years onwards in hazardous types of work. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, although section 118 of the Labour Code and section 510 of the Family Code prohibit young persons under 18 years of age from undertaking hazardous work, this prohibition does not apply to work performed by minors in training establishments when the work is approved by the competent authority and carried out under its supervision. The Committee thus observes that a young person of 14 years of age may be authorized to carry out hazardous work in the context of a training programme, which is not in conformity with Article 3(3) of the Convention. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, the exception under section 118 of the Labour Code is only authorized in the context of teaching or a vocational training course and is not in the context of a labour contract. The Committee nevertheless reminds the Government that, under the terms of Article 3(3) of the Convention, the competent authority may, after consultation with the organizations of the employers and workers concerned, authorize the employment or work of young persons from the age of 16 years onwards on condition that their health, safety and morals are fully protected and that they have received adequate specific instruction or vocational training in the corresponding branch of activity. It notes that in no event can children under 16 years of age be authorized to carry out hazardous work. Part III of the report form. Labour inspection. Further to its previous comments, the Committee takes due note of the statistics contained in the Government’s report concerning the visits carried out by the labour inspection services and the penalties imposed. It notes that 2,262 inspections were carried out between August 2009 and June 2011, and that the number of visits is increasing each year. During these visits, the inspectors identified 70 children working under the minimum age of admission to employment or labour, among which were 37 girls and 33 boys. The Government also indicates that the National Directorate of Labour Inspection Services has elaborated a new support programme component, which provides for an increase in the number of inspectors specialized in the monitoring of child labour, of which there are now 130. It also notes that, when violations are reported, the labour inspection services carry out joint visits with the DIRETIPPAT in order to ensure that care is taken of the children withdrawn from labour. ========================================================================================== CEACR: Observation concerning Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182) Panama (ratification: 2000) Published: 2012 The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows: Article 3 of the Convention. Worst forms of child labour. Clause (b) and Article 7(1). Using, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution, for the production of pornography and for pornographic performances, and penalties. The Committee noted with satisfaction that section 176-A of the new Penal Code, as amended by Act No. 26 of 21 May 2008, punishes pimping by penalties of up to ten years’ imprisonment when the victim is under 18 years. It further noted that the new Penal Code punishes child pornography (sections 180, 181, 183–185) and sexual tourism involving children (section 186). The Committee also noted the Government’s information that the penalties for child pornography and sexual tourism involving minors have been increased. Finally, the Committee noted the Government’s information that 53 cases concerning child pornography were investigated between 2006 and 2009. Articles 5 and 7(1). Monitoring mechanisms and effective application of the Convention. Labour inspectorate. Following its previous comments, the Committee noted the Government’s information that labour inspections had increased remarkably during the period 2006–08 where 1,830 violations were detected by the labour inspectorate. However, of the 1,830 cases, only eight resulted in penalties being applied to the offenders, while 31 were pending before the judiciary. According to the Government, this situation showed a lack of coordination between the activities of the labour inspectorate and the judiciary. The Committee noted that while the number of violations detected by the labour inspectorate was quite high between 2006 and 2008 (1,830 cases), the number of cases in which penalties were applied was low (eight cases). The Committee reminded the Government that, by virtue of Article 7(1) of the Convention, the Government shall take the necessary measures to ensure the effective implementation and enforcement of the provisions of the Convention, including through the provision and application of sufficiently effective and dissuasive penal sanctions. Article 7(2). Effective and time-bound measures. Clause (d). Children at special risk. Street children. The Committee noted the FENASEP’s comment that, according to the newspaper La Prensa, in Chiriquí there was a network which trafficked children to make them beg. By September 2009, 28 child beggars were identified in the urban area of David. The Committee noted the Government’s information that the National Office for Children and Young Persons (SENIAF) created the Office for assisting and protecting street children in situation of exploitation, which is in charge of developing programmes to assist these children. It further noted the Government’s information that 52 children and adolescents were removed from the street in 2008 and 57 in 2009. In 2009, 24 of the children who were removed from the street in 2008 and 39 of the children who were removed from the street in 2009, were selected for admission to the scholarships provided by the Institute for Training and Better Use of Human Resources (IFARHU) and the Committee for the Eradication of Child Labour and Protection of the Adolescent Worker (CETIPPAT). Moreover, one family was included under the “Opportunities” conditional cash transfer programme, which was aimed at helping families in situations of extreme poverty by providing them with financial allowances subject to the condition that children of beneficiary families attend school. ========================================================================================= CEACR: Direct Request concerning Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182) Panama (ratification: 2000) Published: 2012 The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows: Article 3 of the Convention. Worst forms of child labour. Clause (a). Sale and trafficking of children for sexual exploitation. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes that Act No. 14 of 18 May 2007, as amended by Act No. 26 of 21 May 2008, establishes the new Penal Code (new Penal Code) and repeals the old Penal Code. It notes that the new Penal Code punishes the sale of children for purposes of sexual and labour exploitation (section 202) and the internal and international trafficking of children for purposes of sexual exploitation and sexual servitude (sections 177 and 179). The Committee notes that, according to the final technical progress report of the ILO–IPEC regional project “Stop the exploitation. Contribution to the prevention and elimination of commercial sexual exploitation of children in Central America, Panama and the Dominican Republic” (ILO–IPEC regional project against CSEC), the Attorney-General’s Office established specialized prosecutors in crimes against decency, integrity, sexual liberty and trafficking in persons. It finally notes the statistics provided by the Government on the investigations carried out between 2007 and 2009 by the Department of Investigation of the Directorate of Judicial Investigation on crimes against commercial sexual exploitation: 20 cases concerned the sale of persons for commercial sexual exploitation and ten cases concerned trafficking. No children were victims of these offences. Clause (c) and Article 7(1). Use, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities, and penalties. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to take measures to establish penalties for the violation of the prohibition on using, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities. The Committee notes that section 312 of the new Penal Code, as amended by Act No. 26 of 21 May 2008, punishes anyone who trades, purchases, sells or transfers drugs by penalties of up to 30 years’ imprisonment, when a child under 18 years is used to commit the offence. Article 6(1). Programmes of action. Developing a road map to make Central America, Panama and the Dominican Republic a child-labour free zone. The Committee notes with interest that Panama in collaboration with ILO–IPEC launched the project “Developing a road map to make Central America, Panama, and the Dominican Republic a child-labour free zone” (road map), which is a component of the project “Encouraging a work-related enforcement culture” (2008–09). The road map is the strategic national framework to achieve the objectives established in the Decent Work Hemispheric Agenda of eliminating the worst forms of child labour by 2015 and eliminating child labour by 2020. National plan for the prevention and elimination of the commercial sexual exploitation of children. The Committee notes the Government’s information that the national plan for the prevention and elimination of the commercial sexual exploitation of children 2008–10 (national plan against CSEC) developed by the National Committee for the Prevention of Sexual Exploitation Crimes (CONAPREDES), has been adopted. The national plan against CSEC focuses on prevention, assistance to victims, investigation, enforcement and the strengthening of CONAPREDES. The CONAPREDES has carried out various activities to prevent and eliminate the commercial sexual exploitation of children. These include: coordination at the inter-institutional and inter-sectoral levels; the involvement of various actors, such as journalists, the tourist sector and the University of Panama, in the fight against commercial sexual exploitation; awareness-raising activities and training of concerned stakeholders on commercial sexual exploitation. Article 7(2). Effective and time-bound measures. Clauses (a) and (b). Preventing the engagement of children in the worst forms of child labour and assistance for the removal of children from these worst forms of child labour. Action programme for the prevention and elimination of child labour in the provinces of Panama and Colon 2008–13. The Committee notes the Government’s information that the Action programme for the prevention and elimination of child labour in the provinces of Panama and Colon 2008–13 (PAD/PC) financed with national funds was developed in collaboration with ILO–IPEC, which is aimed at withdrawing and preventing 5,000 children between 5 and 15 years from child labour (2,500 children targeted in 2008 and 2,500 children targeted in 2009). The PAD/PC mainly focuses on education as a means to prevent and combat the worst forms of child labour. The services provided under the PAD/PC are offered by a network of public institutions which coordinate with each other, such as the Ministry of Social Development (MIDES), the Ministry of Education (MEDUCA), the Institute for Training and Better Use of Human Resources (IFARHU), the Ministry of Labour (MITRADEL) and the Ministry of Health (MINSA). The Committee notes the Government's information that the PAD/PC has been extended to the provinces of Chiriquí and Veraguas as well as to different educational areas of Panama and Colon. Commercial sexual exploitation. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes that, according to the final technical progress report of the ILO–IPEC regional project against CSEC, 84 children were prevented from commercial sexual exploitation and 88 children were withdrawn from this worst form of child labour in Panama. The majority of children assisted were girls. The Committee further notes the Government’s information on the various activities carried out to prevent commercial sexual exploitation and rehabilitate child victims of this worst form of child labour. Preventive measures mainly include: (a) awareness raising and training of officials and other actors concerned on commercial sexual exploitation; and (b) establishment of agreements with relevant stakeholders to involve them in the fight against commercial sexual exploitation. Measures to remove children from commercial sexual exploitation, rehabilitate them and socially integrate them include: (a) phase II of the action programme to assist child and adolescent victims of commercial sexual exploitation, which is being carried out by the NGO Casa Esperanza in collaboration with ILO–IPEC (40 child victims were identified in phase I and are being assisted; 26 new cases were identified in phase II and are being followed up); and (b) the development of the protocol for care of child and adolescent victims of commercial sexual exploitation, and dissemination and training on it. Clauses (a) and (c). Access to free basic education, including for children removed from the worst forms of child labour. The Committee previously noted that in 2006, the IFARHU provided over 1,500 educational grants with a view to affording assistance to actions targeted at eliminating child labour. In this respect, it noted that in March 2006, a four-year cooperation agreement was concluded between the Committee for the Eradication of Child Labour and Protection of the Adolescent Worker (CETIPATT) and the IFARHU, with the objective of facilitating economic assistance to child workers to encourage them to continue their studies. The Committee notes with interest that the Government is taking, in the context of the implementation of the ILO–IPEC country programme, wide ranging measures targeting children working or at-risk of working aimed at promoting education as a means to contribute to the eradication of poverty and child labour, including its worst forms, especially through the provision of cash transfers, which are in some instances subject to the condition that children stop working and attend school. Examples of these measures are: (a) the Eradication of Child Labour Scholarships Programme carried out by the IFARHU following the 2006 agreement (9,326 scholarships were awarded between 2006 and 2009); (b) the “Opportunities” programme carried out by the MIDES (in 2009, a total of 4,105 child workers from families in extreme poverty were reported to have benefited from the programme; in 2008, 313,733 families were reported to have benefited from the programme); (c) the Educational Promotion Programme (carried out by the Insurance Company Assa); (d) the Solidarity Day Programme (targeting 120 young workers and carried out by the enterprise UNION FENOSA and CETIPPAT); (e) the support classes and other educational services under the PAD/PC (2,250 children in 58 schools benefited from the programme in 2008 and 557 support classes were organized). The Committee further notes that according to the final technical progress report of September 2009 of the ILO–IPEC country programme, 890 children were removed from the worst forms of child labour and reintegrated in school. It also notes that, according to the same source, by June 2009, 20,000 children and young people in extreme poverty had entered the educational system and 5,600 were removed from child labour and enrolled in school. Clause (d). Children at special risk. Child domestic workers. The Committee previously noted the information provided by the Government concerning the project for the prevention and elimination of the worst forms of child labour in Central America and the Dominican Republic. It noted that in the context of this project direct action targeted over 13,800 children and made it possible to prevent the engagement of children in domestic work and to remove them from such work. Article 8. International cooperation. Commercial sexual exploitation. The Committee previously noted that the ILO–IPEC regional project against CSEC envisages the strengthening of horizontal collaboration between the countries participating in the project. The Committee notes that, according to the final technical progress report of July 2009 of the ILO–IPEC regional project against CSEC, horizontal collaboration between countries participating in the project was strengthened, inter alia, through: developing a regional database with approximately 400 institutions working on the theme of commercial sexual exploitation of children; exchanging information between district attorneys and police officers on sexual crimes and experiences in police investigation methods; and supporting the stakeholders concerned (such as migration offices, the Commission of Central American Chiefs of Police, and the INTERPOL subregional office) in the common fight against trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation of children. Part V of the report form. Application of the Convention in practice. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s information that, in the context of the implementation of the national plan against child labour and the ILO–IPEC country programme, a child labour survey was carried out in 2008, which shows that 89,767 children between 5 and 17 years of age work. The next survey is planned for 2010.