The Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families today concluded its consideration of the initial periodic report of Congo. The Committee commended the State for helping returning migrants to set up businesses quickly, while asking questions about the “Congolisation” of certain jobs and the status of Rwandan refugees residing in Congo.
A Committee Expert said they had been happy to hear that units had been set up for returning migrants to enable them to set up businesses within 24 hours. This was potentially a very good practice that could help migrant workers worldwide.
Myriam Poussi, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said reports indicated that the State was developing a policy called “Congolisation”, which was tantamount to exercising national preference. It made the situation of many migrant workers very worrying, as they were subject to discrimination when attempting to access certain jobs reserved for Congolese nationals. Could more information on this be provided?
Ms. Poussi also noted that in the past, Rwandan nationals had acquired refugee status in Congo, but today, many did not go to their embassy to obtain a passport and thus could not fulfil the conditions for obtaining refugee status. These were people who had a broken relationships with their State. It would be better for Congo to consider regularising these people as a solution. Would this be possible? How many people were affected by this?
Responding to questions, the delegation said the “Congolisation” of jobs was not really connected to a specific piece of legislation. Concerns regarding “Congolisation” related to national preference, particularly within the oil industry, where decrees promoted the employment of Congolese whenever possible. Access to the labour market was equal for all, but the State needed to promote competition between Congolese nationals.
The delegation said in 2014, Congo reviewed persons with refugee status and counted 8,000 refugees who could no longer justify being at risk of persecution and therefore should no longer benefit from refugee status. Some 813 Rwandan nationals who had benefited from protection from the Congolese Government now held irregular status in Congo. This situation was on the agenda of the Government.
Aimé Clovis Guillond, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Congo to the United Nations Office at Geneva and head of the delegation, presenting the report, said Congo was a longstanding welcoming place for immigrant populations. While the lack of data prevented the State from knowing the true number of migrant workers, they represented a large number, especially when taking those working in the informal sector into account.
Mr. Guillond reported that, in partnership with the International Organization for Migration, a programme was developed in 2014 to allow the Government to mobilise the Congolese diaspora, with a view to addressing the lack of qualified personnel in health and higher education. A liaison office was created at the Congolese Embassy in France in January 2024, serving as an intermediary between job-seeking Congolese abroad and employers established in Congo.
In concluding remarks, Ms. Poussi thanked the delegation for the dialogue, which aimed to support the State to ensure better implementation of the Convention. The Committee had noted weakness in terms of policies and national plans of actions, particularly concerning migrant workers. Comprehensive data gathering on migration and Congolese migrants abroad was crucial. It was important that there was political will to achieve this. The Committee urged the State to redouble its efforts in this area, she concluded.
In his closing remarks, Mr. Guillond thanked the Committee for having devoted time to the consideration of the report. The State aimed to overcome the challenges it faced and had taken note of all recommendations made during the dialogue. Mr. Guillond thanked the Committee for the positive dialogue. Congo awaited the Committee’s recommendations with great interests.
The delegation of Congo was comprised of representatives from the Ministry of Public Service, Labour and Social Security; the National Social Security Fund; and the Permanent Mission of Congo to the United Nations Office in Geneva.
The webcast of Committee meetings can be found here. All meeting summaries can be found here. Documents and reports related to the Committee’s thirty-eighth session can be found here.
The Committee will next meet at 5:30 p.m. on Friday June 14 to close its thirty-eighth session.
Report
The Committee has before it the initial report of Congo (CMW/C/COG/1).
Presentation of Report
AIMÉ CLOVIS GUILLOND, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Congo to the United Nations Office at Geneva and head of the delegation, said Congo was a longstanding welcoming place for immigrant populations. The capital, Brazzaville, was previously the capital of French Equatorial Africa which attracted many people from different places, and this had continued to this day. Welcoming foreigners was a tradition in Congo and migration had never been instrumentalised for political purposes. While the lack of data prevented the State from knowing the true number of migrant workers, they represented a large number, especially when taking those working in the informal sector into account.
The legal framework governing migrant workers in Congo was based on national and international legislation. At the national level, the Constitution of 25 October 2015 was supplemented by several laws, including Law No. 29-2017, which set the conditions for the entry, stay and exit of foreigners in the Republic; Law No. 12-2023 of May 2023, establishing the universal health insurance scheme; and Law No. 41-2021, of September 2021, establishing the right to asylum and refugee status in the Republic of Congo, among others. The Congolese social security system applied to all workers covered by the Labour Code, including all foreign nationals. This social insurance scheme guaranteed disability, old-age and death benefits; benefits for accidents at work; and family and maternity benefits. Migrant workers and members of their families enjoyed the same rights as nationals.
At the international level, Congo was a State party to International Labour Organization Conventions 97 and 143 on migrant workers. Congo had also signed several bilateral agreements, including with Rwanda in December 2016 on reciprocity of social security coverage, and with the United States and France in 2005 and 2014 respectively, allowing spouses of diplomatic and consular staff to be able to work in the host country. An agreement signed in June 2014 with the Democratic Republic of the Congo allowed people living along the border to cross the river for a short stay of up to three days, with a pass or a national identity card.
Within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, there was now a department dedicated to Congolese abroad. In partnership with the International Organization for Migration, a programme was developed in 2014 to allow the Government to mobilise the Congolese diaspora, with a view to addressing the lack of qualified personnel in health and higher education. A liaison office was created at the Congolese Embassy in France in January 2024, serving as an intermediary between job-seeking Congolese abroad and employers established in Congo.
Concerning prisons, Law No. 20-2022 of April 2022 on the Penitentiary Code in the Republic of Congo guaranteed health care, including medical care, to detainees regardless of their category. The Congolese Family Code recognised the possibility for migrant children born on Congolese soil to be registered and to obtain the civil status document, and later, when they reached adulthood, to request Congolese nationality. Migrant workers and members of their families in detention enjoyed the right to communicate with the consular and diplomatic authorities of their State of origin. The Congolese judicial authorities regularly provided other States with information about migrant workers in detention. In accordance with the legislation in force in Congo, a migrant worker could challenge an expulsion decree before the Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court.
Mr. Guillond concluded by stating that the country had many challenges when it came to migrant workers, with data collection being one of the main stumbling blocks. However, these difficulties did not affect Congo’s determination to work for the protection of the rights of migrant workers and members of their families.
Questions by Committee Experts
MYRIAM POUSSI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, thanked the State party for ratifying the Convention. Migration presented challenges for all States and despite this, few countries had ratified the Convention, so Congo was encouraged to be a defender of the Convention and to encourage broader ratification. Ms. Poussi acknowledged that Congo had done its best to deal with obstacles in submitting the report. The report contained very few statistics on migrant workers which made it difficult to conduct a rigorous assessment on the role of migration in the country.
Could the delegation describe how treaties were incorporated into domestic law? How did this apply to the Convention? In 2012, the State adopted a law governing the treatment of families and children in difficulties. What provisions of this law were relevant to migration? The report mentioned a 2023 bilateral agreement with the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Could more information be provided about the scope of this agreement and its effect on the welfare of migrants? How was the 1984 law on legal assistance applied? Was there a need to revise the law? If so, what was the timetable for its revision? Did the law provide for legal assistance for migrant workers? Could any statistical data be provided?
Congo had adopted a law in 1996 establishing conditions for entry, stay and exit of foreign nationals in the country, amending the previous act on the topic. Which areas had to be brought into line with the Convention? How many Congolese persons were residing outside the country and how many foreign nationals resided in Congo? Congo seemed to be more a country of origin rather than a country of transit or destination; the report was not very clear about the situation. Statistical data was crucial in this regard. Could more specific information be provided?
There was an African observatory on migration, headquartered in Morocco, which aimed to assist States in Africa by collecting specific data. Had the State approached this observatory on migration to receive assistance on data gathering and policy making? The National Commission on Human Rights had reported that since the ratification of the Convention, the State had not yet drafted any policies or strategies for the benefit of migrant workers. Could the delegation comment on this? Reports indicated that the State was developing a policy called “Congolisation”, which was tantamount to exercising national preference. It made the situation of many migrant workers very worrying, as they were subject to discrimination when attempting to access certain jobs reserved for Congolese nationals. Could more information on this be provided?
Could the delegation provide any information on the National Plan against Trafficking (2014 – 2017). What were the goals of this plan? Had there been an effective evaluation of its implementation? What activities had been conducted which specifically focused on migrant workers and their families? Was there a new plan on trafficking? What provisions and actions had been planned for prosecution of traffickers and smugglers? Had bilateral agreements been made with countries of transit or destination to combat this scourge? What was being done to provide protection to victims of trafficking? Congo had an agreement with Benin to combat trafficking against children. Why was this agreement made with Benin? Were there specific problems between Benin and Congo and trafficking in children? Could more information on the outcome of this agreement be provided?
EDGAR CORZO SOSA, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said information and data was very important. It was not a good sign that the Government was saying there was no information, when it was their responsibility to generate such information. This had a knock-on effect to other human rights violations. It was eight years since Congo had ratified the Convention. Was there a will to correct this approach and ensure Congo obliged by its international obligations? The Committee welcomed the report, despite it being six years late. Were civil society and academia able to participate in the drafting of the report? If the process had been opened effectively, the report would have included much more information. How did the consultation take place and what were the contributions of those involved?
Regarding reports of mistreatment by police officers in the mass expulsion of migrants from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the report recognised that the problem existed, but said there had been no complaints or investigations. Could the Governments carry out investigations in this regard, or did it need to wait for complaints? Could more information on the expulsion of migrants be provided?
The National Commission on Human Rights had “B” status under the Paris Principles, which meant that it needed strengthening. It needed to be given all resources necessary to ensure it could do its job. How did the Congo plan to strengthen the National Commission? It was concerning that the Convention had not been invoked before the courts. The report said people in an irregular situation were given the opportunity to regularise their situation, which was an important standard. How did the State promote regularisation? What was done to ensure individuals could regularise their situation within the required timeframe? Once the timeframe had lapsed, what were the consequences?
A Committee Expert said the report stated that when migrants did not request residential status in the required timeframe, they could be issued a prison sentence, and this also applied for the renewal of residence permits. Were these penalties issued in practice? Was there any proposed reform for this legislation to decriminalise this offence? One law referred to the expulsion of individuals who were considered “undesirable”. Could more details be provided on what scenarios would bring about the expulsion of an individual due to undesirable behaviour? What measures had been implemented to prevent all forms of statelessness, especially among children?
Another Expert congratulated Congo for taking part in the dialogue, which was testament of their commitment to protecting the rights of migrants and their families. What was the methodology used for data gathering? How did the State work with various institutions to gather data for the report? How were civil society involved? Could more information be provided on complaints made by migrant workers? Had investigations and unannounced visits been conducted to places of deprivation of liberty? The Congo had been struck by natural disasters, such as floods. What had been done to assist migrants in these cases?
A Committee Expert asked what types of agreements were in place with countries of destination for Congo citizens? What principles were these agreements prepared under? Was the Convention used to improve these agreements? If so, which principles of the Convention were used in these agreements? If not, could an analysis of the Convention and these agreements be carried out? Which countries had the biggest inflow of migrants from Congo? Which countries hosted the most Congolese in transit?
Another Expert asked about the main patterns of migration for Congo. Was the education system developed to ensure all children, including migrants, had access to education? Was access for health ensured for all people, including migrants? What level of access was ensured? Had diplomatic offices been established in other countries? Females comprised the largest percentage of the migrant population. What gender mechanisms had been established? Had a gender law or other pieces of legislation been adopted? What was being done to facilitate data collection?
A Committee Expert said they recognised the challenges Congo faced, including related to its geographic location and borders. Around 50 per cent of the population had immigrated abroad for work. What were the institutional mechanisms to assist returning migrant workers? Were there any facilities which allowed for duty free imports for migrants who brought in a certain number of funds? When funds were transmitted, did the Government ensure they were not exploited by financial institutions? Given Congo’s geographical location, it was highly likely that trafficking was occurring. Was there a consultative mechanism within the region that analysed how to best prevent trafficking and prosecute traffickers?
FATIMATA DIALLO, Committee Chair, asked about the different bilateral agreements mentioned in the report. Could more information be provided, including regarding the agreement with Gabon? What had its impact been since it was adopted? Convention 189 of the International Labour Organization afforded particular attention to domestic workers. Did Congo envisage ratifying this convention and the relevant measures which would allow for its implementation? Was there a national policy on migration? What were the programmes and projects planned to breathe life into this national policy? If such a policy did not exist, was the Government intending to put one in place? The report said the State issued cards to persons of all nationalities allowing for the exercise of artisanal trades. What about workers in other sectors? Could non-nationals engage in other trades? Did legislation prevent migrants from engaging in activities other than what they were contracted for? What happened to migrants who found themselves in the informal sector and did not have a work contract? Could there be a professional transition?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said Congo was originally part of French Equatorial Africa and had welcomed people coming from other parts of the world since colonial times. The State had a reputation of welcoming workers from different countries. A few years ago, conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the Central African Republic led to workers from these countries coming seeking refuge in Congo across the country. There was also significant immigration from West Africa, which provided an explanation of the agreement with Benin. Trafficking often began in Benin, with people sent to the Central African Republic and other areas. Congo was typically a destination country, but had also been a transit country, including during the conflict with Rwanda in the 1990s. There was also Congolese migration, including to bordering countries.
Generally, statistics could be found in Congo, but these were compiled by sector. For example, within the social security sector, it might be possible to obtain statistics on migrant workers who were registered. The issue came with trying to compile these statistics. The State was aiming to gather the necessary synergy across institutions involved in migrant workers to ensure data gathering and dissemination could be consolidated.
Congo had initiated a vast programme for ratifying conventions. However, the State had not yet ratified the International Labour Organization Convention 189 because there was already a regulation in place for domestic workers. The State was considering a legislative overhaul which would consider all ratified international conventions. A dossier had been submitted to the International Labour Organization on what needed to be done to implement the conventions which were being ratified. The State had received responses to these questions. It was working to ensure that all conventions which had been ratified could be applied in practice.
Regarding the “Congolisation” of jobs, this was not really connected to a specific piece of legislation. Historically, there was an act from 1967, which provided for the “Africanisation” of certain jobs to bolster certain sectors after the dissolution of French Equatorial Africa and the withdrawal of many white people from the country. Concerns regarding “Congolisation” related to national preference, particularly within the oil industry, where decrees promoted the employment of Congolese whenever possible. Access to the labour market was equal for all, but the State needed to promote competition between Congolese nationals.
An agreement was in place which allowed French nationals who worked in Congo to access pension benefits at the ends of their contracts. All these people now benefitted from their pensions. A similar agreement was in place currently with Rwanda, and other social security agreements were in places with other countries.
There was a new law with new provisions relating to the entry and stay of foreigners on Congolese territory. There had been no large scale refoulment exercises by Congo. However, in 2012, the Government had organised an operation to address issues relating to refugees being expelled to the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The State was able to organise the return of refugees who had been expelled in error. There were no recorded cases of foreigners who were imprisoned because they were in an irregular situation. Those in Congo in an irregular situation did not yet benefit from all the conditions necessary to regularise their status. This was because these migrants, including Rwandan migrants, did not wish to go to their home countries’ embassies to obtain their passports, which were essential for testifying to their refugee status. This made it difficult to change their status, but they were not expelled or imprisoned.
A national commission had been put in place to combat statelessness. The Government had taken steps to register all births, as the first step to combatting statelessness. The Government had also begun awareness raising campaigns promoting birth registration.
In Congo, as soon as treaties were ratified, they had a higher status than national law. Congo was fully implementing the Convention. All victims of rights violations were entitled to reparations and redress under the law. Congo had a 2,400 kilometer border which people could cross easily. Being a small country that faced strong migratory pressures led the State to impose certain policies.
Questions by Committee Experts
MYRIAM POUSSI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, thanked the delegation for the answers provided so far. The Committee had received information that a national digital identity system had been implemented with the assistance of the African Development Bank. Had there been any progress since 2021 regarding data collection? Could information also be provided on the integrated system for civil registration data? What data gathering methods would be used and how would the data be used?
In the past, Rwandan nationals had acquired refugee status in Congo, but today, as the delegation said, many did not go to their embassy to obtain a passport and thus could not fulfil the conditions for obtaining refugee status. These were people who had a broken relationships with their State. Would it be better for Congo to consider regularising these people as a solution? Would this be possible? How many people were affected by this?
EDGAR CORZO SOSA, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said although statelessness related to birth registration, it didn’t stop there. A person needed to have a nationality. Registration didn’t grant nationality. How would the State party promote access to nationality? What were the reasons for Congo’s reservations to articles of the Conventions concerning interstate and individual communications? The report stated that any individual going to Congo whose State did not have an agreement with the Congo could only enjoy certain rights and freedoms if there was reciprocity between Congo and the State. Could the delegation clarify this?
FATIMATA DIALLO, Committee Chair, asked if some statistics could be sent in writing, notably on social security. Were there any trans-border mechanisms in place with the Democratic Republic of the Congo? Was there a system for documenting migration flows or a policy in this area?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said incentives were provided to bring back Congolese nationals abroad. In several visits abroad and meetings with the Congolese diaspora, the President had asked Congolese nationals to consider returning to Congo for work. A programme was in place to encourage people to come back and join the civil service. Trade fairs promoted the business and employment opportunities available in Congo. The Congolese agency for business creation allowed people to come to Congo and establish their business quickly and efficiently, sometimes even within 24 hours. There was a fund to support new business start-ups in the country.
The report was the result of a participatory and inclusive process. Consultations had been held, which involved disseminating the document to concerned institutions. A body met frequently to take stock of all conventions ratified by the Congo. Civil society had been involved in the preparation of the report from the outset. The State was making considerable efforts to increase the budget of the National Human Rights Commission, and aimed to bring the budget in line with the requirements for A status.
The Commission for Defense and Security was a monitoring mechanism in place to tackle security and border issues with the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Central African Republic and Angola. Those crossing the border should hold a national identification card or a laissez-passer.
In 2014, Congo reviewed persons with refugee status and counted 8,000 refugees who could no longer justify being at risk of persecution and therefore should no longer benefit from refugee status. Some 813 Rwandan nationals who had benefited from protection from the Congolese Government now held irregular status in Congo. This situation was on the agenda of the Government.
Foreigners who arrived at the border of Congo needed to comply with the conditions stipulated in a 2017 law to have access to the country. If the conditions were not fulfilled, they were rejected and returned, unless they made an asylum request. A 2021 law set out the conditions and modalities for the acceptance of asylum requests.
To date, Congo had not recorded figures on stateless persons. Preventative measures had been taken in terms of regularly registering births, to prevent people from being stateless. This was being monitored with the support of the United Nations High Commission for Refugees and technical ministries. Obtaining civil registry certificates was free of charge in Congo. Implementing the civil registry platform meant the State needed to completely digitise the civil registry and all statistical data. This was currently in an advanced stage of implementation.
Congo had not made the commitment to allow the Committee to receive interstate and individual communications related to the State. This would possibly change with time. Reciprocity was one of the principles governing interstate relations. Congo upheld the principle of non-discrimination, which was applicable to all migrant workers and covered their rights in entirety. Even if a foreign national was from a country which had not ratified the Convention, the principle of non-discrimination still applied.
The largest number of Congolese nationals outside the country could be found in France. It was regrettable that France had not yet ratified the Convention. There were bilateral agreements in place, including the agreement between the two countries on concerted management of migratory flows and co-development signed in 2007. The agreement was the main instrument governing migration between the two countries.
Questions by Committee Experts
EDGAR CORZO SOSA, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said Congo had appeared before the Committee on the Rights of the Child in March this year. Why could the centers and commissions for statistical data mentioned in that dialogue not provide data to the treaty bodies? Could more information about these entities be provided? Congo was undergoing legislative reform to ensure that migrant workers and members of their families had the right to participate in public affairs, including the right to vote and the right to be elected. What was the state of play of this revision? Would it be approved soon? What could be done to support Congo to ensure the revision process was concluded and these rights could be exercised? Had private employment agencies who recruited workers to work abroad been established in Congo? This would help to prevent irregular migration. Did the Government truly comply with the recommendations issued by the National Human Rights Commission?
One Committee Expert commended the efforts made by Congo to ratify fundamental international instruments, including the International Labour Organization’s Convention 97 on migration for employment; Convention 143 on migrant workers; Convention 51 on civil service workers; Convention 157 on the maintenance of social security rights; Convention 154 on collective bargaining; Convention 129 on labour inspection in agriculture; and Convention 155 on health and safety at work. There had been significant efforts to ratify International Labour Organization Conventions and the Committee commended this. Would the State consider ratifying Convention 29 on forced labour? What efforts had been made to combat trafficking? Did the State envisage ratifying Convention 189 on domestic workers? What measures were taken to protect domestic workers, who were usually in a vulnerable situation? Would Congo consider ratifying Convention 190 on violence and harassment in the workplace? What efforts had been made in terms of labour inspections? Was it ensured that labour inspectors could carry out their work impartially?
A Committee Expert said they had been happy to hear that units had been set up for returning migrants to enable them to set up businesses within 24 hours. If this was true and it was done through an institutional process, without political involvement, this practice should be shared with regional partners. This was potentially a very good practice that could help migrant workers worldwide.
