Through the Abolition of Forced Labor Convention, the United Nations encouraged countries affiliated with the International Labor Organization to outlaw the use of forced labor as punishment for political dissent.
Since the eighteenth century, human rights advocates have denounced human labor bondage and called for its abolition. Although slavery has been the most conspicuous form of bondage through the years, another type of bondage known as forced labor was widely practiced and widely condemned in the twentieth century. Slaves are considered chattel, usually of individuals. Forced labor has been used as a punishment for the expression of political opinions that are not favored by existing authorities and for economic exploitation that benefits the state. Compulsory employment of indigenous peoples in colonial mines, so-called “correctional labor” for enemies of the people in revolutionary Russia, labor camps associated with Joseph Stalin’s five-year plans in the 1930’s, and the compulsory employment of conquered peoples of Europe to serve the Nazi war machine are examples of this type of bondage. Shortly after World War II, concerted efforts were made to outlaw forced labor throughout the world.
In November, 1947, the American Federation of Labor
Although progress had been made, the AFL also noted that there were a number of similar cases which were cause for concern. Emphasis was placed on the detention of millions of prisoners of war as forced laborers. In addition, some members of the United Nations operated corrective labor camps that amounted to a form of state slavery where people were punished, often without due process, for expressing political opinions. The AFL resolution was passed.
On February 14, 1949, the ECOSOC took up the AFL resolution amid considerable controversy. The United States charged that the Soviet Union
Predictably, the Soviet representative, Semyon K. Tsarapkin
After rejecting a Soviet-sponsored draft resolution to establish an international commission to study worldwide working conditions, the ECOSOC invited the ILO to investigate the problem of forced labor and to determine its extent, and instructed the secretary-general of the United Nations to cooperate closely with the ILO. In August, 1949, the United States presented a resolution to set up a commission of inquiry, but the majority of the ECOSOC decided that pursuing the investigation would be useless unless all governments, especially the major powers, were willing to cooperate. The Soviet Union and its allies made it very clear that they would not cooperate with this investigation, which they assumed was politically motivated and aimed primarily against them. After lengthy debate, the ECOSOC asked the secretary-general to ask member governments to agree to cooperate in an inquiry. By the end of 1949, thirty governments had issued statements pledging cooperation.
In 1950, the question of investigating forced labor was postponed once more. The Soviet Union was boycotting U.N. activities in protest of the denial of China’s U.N. seat to the Chinese Communists after their ouster of the Chinese Nationalists from the mainland. The ECOSOC decided not to pursue the forced labor issue in the absence of the Soviet delegation. The ILO did begin discussions on establishing a commission of inquiry into the nature and extent of forced labor. A year later, on June 27, 1951, U.N. secretary-general Trygve Lie and ILO director-general David A. Morse jointly announced the formation of an ad hoc committee on forced labor.
In October, 1951, the committee members began their work in Geneva. They announced their plans to formulate and distribute to all governments (not only United Nations and ILO members) a questionnaire asking about the use of punitive, educational, or corrective labor as well as other cases of compulsory work in each country. An April 1, 1952, deadline was set for the questionnaire’s return. The committee announced its hopes to complete its work by the end of 1952 or early 1953.
On May 27, 1953, the committee presented its report to the ILO and the ECOSOC. Its investigation led it to the conclusion that systems of forced labor did exist in twenty-four countries or territories. Forced labor was used as a form of political coercion to “correct” political opinions and to promote the state’s economic prosperity. This report was not discussed at the ECOSOC’s summer, 1953, session. The United States called for its inclusion on the agenda for the fall session, arguing that the issue harmonized with the United Nations’ determination to promote social and economic progress, to achieve international cooperation in solving problems, and to further human rights.
The committee’s report discussed not only isolated examples but also systemic government action which produced wholesale suppression of human rights. The Soviet Union was identified as the chief culprit, using forced labor as political coercion and to promote its national economy. Georgi F. Saksin
The next step in the slow process came a year later, when the Third Committee approved a resolution condemning forced labor and calling for continued efforts to end it. The resolution also called on the U.N. General Assembly to endorse an ECOSOC condemnation of systems of forced labor used as political coercion or punishment for holding or expressing political views. This resolution passed on December 14, 1954. Consideration of the forced labor issue seemed substantially intertwined with Cold War politics, as the working definition of forced labor was given as Soviet practice.
Prompted by the Third Committee’s resolution, the ECOSOC and the General Assembly condemned systems of forced labor and urged governments to reexamine laws and administrative practices to find the means to end this threat to basic human rights. U.N. secretary-general Dag Hammarskjöld and the ILO director-general were asked to prepare a further report, to include any new information that had come to light since the 1953 report. The new report was to be completed by December, 1955, so that the director-general could present it to the ILO governing body and to the delegates to the 1956 and 1957 ILO Conference. In the meantime, the ECOSOC issued a condemnation of all forms of forced labor on the grounds that it contradicted the principles of the U.N. Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The condemnation urged action to stop forced labor wherever it existed.
In June, 1956, delegates at the Thirty-ninth General Conference of the ILO
Finally, on June 25, 1957, the Abolition of Forced Labor Convention was ready for a vote at the Fortieth General Conference in Geneva. The ILO adopted three new international conventions: forced labor, weekly rest in commerce and offices, and protection of indigenous populations. The forced labor convention was approved 240-0, with the Soviet Union, which had joined the ILO in 1954, abstaining. The terms of the Abolition of Forced Labor Convention called on ratifying states to suppress and to eschew future use of forced labor for political reasons, economic development, labor discipline, punishment for participation in strikes or other labor disputes, or as a means of discrimination. Since the ILO pursued this convention on behalf of the United Nations, the June 25, 1957, vote committed the United Nations to work to end forced labor. The convention took effect on January 17, 1959.
The United Nations’ moral power had been marshaled once more against those who would abuse their own populations. World “public opinion” has contributed to the increase in pressure on governments and agencies to end various forms of abuse. The United Nations, through its General Assembly and affiliated organizations, has done admirable work in assembling people from many lands and cultures ready to pass judgment on which actions are abusive. Theoretically, the Abolition of Forced Labor Convention was a landmark in human rights, but in practical terms the impact of the convention has been less clear.
In the late 1950’s, the Soviet Union began to shut down its infamous “gulag” system. That action seems to have been more domestically motivated than the result of world opinion. In 1956, Nikita S. Khrushchev
Given the energetic American promotion of the forced labor issue in the late 1940’s and the 1950’s, one might conclude that the United States would be one of the first states to ratify the Abolition of Forced Labor Convention. For a variety of reasons, however, including domestic constitutional issues, the United States has often opposed international human rights agreements.
In 1963, President John F. Kennedy
Although more than one hundred states had ratified the Abolition of Forced Labor Convention by the early 1970’s, the convention has not been the final word on forced labor or produced its complete abolition. One of the by-products of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights was a charter outlining states’ obligations regarding human rights. In 1966, the U.N. General Assembly approved the final text for the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
-
Barros, James, ed. The United Nations: Past, Present, and Future. New York: Free Press, 1972. This collection of seven essays analyzes the various components of the United Nations, emphasizing the international body’s capacity for survival and its superiority to the League of Nations. -
Commission to Study the Organization of Peace. The United Nations and Human Rights. Dobbs Ferry, N.Y.: Oceana, 1968. A sympathetic report on the theory and practice of the pursuit of human rights through U.N. auspices from 1945 to the mid-1960’s. -
Fernbach, Alfred. Soviet Coexistence Strategy: A Case Study of Experience in the International Labor Organization. Washington, D.C.: Public Affairs Press, 1960. Very useful in sorting out the various Soviet stances through the 1950’s. -
Jacobson, Harold K. “The USSR and the ILO.” International Organization 14 (September, 1960): 402-428. Compares nicely with Fernbach, although it does not offer similar detail. -
Jenks, C. W. Social Justice in the Law of Nations: The ILO Impact After Fifty Years. New York: Oxford University Press, 1970. An informative and engaging account of ILO efforts to shape labor and human rights policies from the end of World War I. -
Osmańczyk, Edmund Jan. The Encyclopedia of the United Nations and International Relations. Edited by Anthony Mango. 3d ed. New York: Taylor & Francis, 2002. Compilation of information on the United Nations, including entries on thousands of agreements. -
Robertson, A. H. Human Rights in the World. 4th ed. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1996. Astonishing in its scope, this volume surveys and appraises the human rights efforts of the United Nations and various regional organizations. Very good for providing fundamental bases for those beginning to explore human rights questions. -
Rubinstein, Alvin Z. The Soviets in International Organizations: Changing Policy Toward Developing Countries, 1953-1963. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1964. A useful supplement to a study of Soviet foreign policy, very detailed but short on historical perspective on motivation. -
Sohn, Louis B., and Thomas Buergenthal. International Protection of Human Rights. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1973. Massive tome developed as a textbook but very useful as a source for detailed discussion of specific human rights cases.
United Nations Charter Convention
United Nations Adopts Convention on Genocide
United Nations Adopts the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
United Nations Convention Suppressing Human Trafficking Is Adopted
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Statute Is Approved
United Nations Amends Its International Slavery Treaty
United Nations Sets Rules for Treatment of Prisoners
United Nations Condemns Racial Discrimination
United Nations Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Is Adopted