European Court of Human Rights
9 February 2016
Facts
The applicant, a prisoner, complained that he had reached the age of retirement in Switzerland but was still required by law to perform work in prison. He was sanctioned for his refusal to work.
Complaint
The applicant alleged a violation of his right not to be required to perform forced or compulsory labour. He complained of being obliged to work while serving his sentence, despite having reach retirement age. He relied on Article 4 of the Convention.
Court’s ruling
This was the first time that the Court had to address the issue of requirement for a prisoner to work after reaching retirement age. The Court had to decide whether the work performed by the applicant was “work required to be done in the ordinary course of detention” within the meaning of Article 4 of the Convention.
The Court took into account several factors when reaching its decision, namely the aim of the work imposed, its nature, its extent and the manner in which it had to be performed. The Court noted that the aim of the obligation was to offset the harmful effects of long-term imprisonment by providing a structure to a prisoner’s daily life. Also, the nature of the work was adapted to the age and health of the applicant, and he was paid for the work done. Finally, the Court noted that there was no consensus among Member States on this issue, which meant that no absolute prohibition could be inferred from Article 4 regarding compulsory work after reaching retirement age.
For all these reasons the Court found that the work requirement was covered by Article 4 §3 (a) of the Convention and could not be considered “forced or compulsory labour”.