Share
Wednesday, September 6, 2006
Share

Nature of the Case

Claim by International Commission of Jurists that Portugal had failed to properly supervise child labour; Interpretation on prohibition of child labour; nature of States’ obligations under European Social Charter; use of statistics as evidence; adequacy of measures taken by State; previous consideration of matter by Committee in periodic reporting procedure.

Enforcement of the Decision and Outcomes

The Committee of Ministers, which is empowered to make recommendations on the basis of the Committee’s legal findings, concluded slightly differently and considered that their previous recommendation, emanating from the supervision cycle, was still in force and recalled that Portugal will present in its next report the measures taken. The Committee then examined the matter again during the XV-2 Supervision Cycle and noted that Portugal had amended the Constitution to prohibit employment of school children, increased the minimum age for employment, legislatively defined light work, strengthened sanctions, increased inspection visits and adopted a plan to eliminate exploitative child labour. But the Committee found though that there was insufficient evidence of the prohibition being applied in practice. In 2005, a Portuguese diplomat to the UN pointed out during a working group discussion that the case had helped the country better tackle the problems of child labour and that the incidence of prohibited child labour had fallen dramatically: from 6.3 instances per 1000 children to 0.05 instances per 1000 in 2003

Significance of the Case

The case has been referred to frequently in the subsequent case law of the European Committee on Social Rights, particularly the statement that ‘the aim and purpose of the Charter, being a human rights instrument, is to protect rights not merely theoretically, but also in fact’ (para. 32). Nathalie Prouvez, the lead advocate for the ICJ, commented that the case was important since ‘it was not a narrow case; it went beyond traditional labour rights’. The Committee case also established the principle that cases that raised issues covered in the general supervision process were admissible.

Groups Involved in the Case

Claimant and Advocate: International Commission of Jurists 81A, avenue de Châtelaine – P.O. Box 216 CH-1219 Châtelaine/Geneva – Switzerland Tel : +4122 979 38 00 Fax : +4122 979 38 01 or 04 Email: icj@icj.org Website: www.icj.org Intervener European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) 5, Boulevard Roi Albert II B-1210 BRUSSELS BELGIUM +32-2-2240-411 Fax: +32-2-2240-454 or +32-2-2240-455 E-mail: ETUC@ETUC.ORG Web: www.etuc.org