The violation report and the employer’s position before inspection
The Law Office of Ali Barakat, from Baghdad, al-Yarmouk, sets out the employer’s position after a labour inspection visit: how the report is prepared, what period may be given to remedy a violation, how referral to the Court of Labor or the initiation of a criminal case takes place, and what evidential weight the report has before the court. The source is Labour Law No. 37 of 2015, published in the Iraqi Official Gazette, issue 4386, of 9/11/2015, especially articles 129, 134, 135 and 169, together with article 122 on closure or stoppage where safety instructions are breached. The powers of entry and examination belong on the page on the committee’s powers.
The visit report and the period for remedy
After every inspection visit, the inspection committee must prepare a detailed report containing a summary of the violations and recommendations for legal measures against defaulting employers, under article 129, third. That report is the document on which any later warning or referral is built. It is not a substitute for a judicial judgment.
Within the committee’s own powers, it may request the employer in writing to carry out, urgently, either changes within a specified period in structures or mechanical equipment so that they comply with the provisions on workers’ safety and health, or urgent measures in the event of imminent danger, under article 129, first. That period is fixed by the written request in the particular case. Where danger is severe and admits of no delay, work may be stopped wholly or in part, or the place evacuated, without waiting for that period.
If the employer refuses to implement occupational safety and health instructions, or prevents labour inspection committees from entering the workplace or obstructs their work, the Ministry may decide to close the workplace or to stop one or more machines until the cause of the closure or stoppage ceases, after warning the employer to remove the violation, under article 122. Workers who stopped work for that reason are entitled to their full wages for the period of closure or stoppage. The inspection committee prepares a written report on the violation.
The warning, referral to the Court of Labor, and a criminal case
The Minister of Labour and Social Affairs may, under article 134, address a warning to the defaulting employer before referring the employer to the Court of Labor. The Minister may, on the basis of the inspection committee’s report, decide to refer the defaulting employer to the Court of Labor under the provisions of that chapter, or to initiate a criminal case against the defaulting employer on the committee’s recommendation based on the inspection-visit report. The first paragraph of the article refers to “the court” in the sense clarified by the second paragraph: the Court of Labor. The Court of Labor’s jurisdiction over the civil and criminal claims provided for in this Law is set in article 166.
The inspection committee’s report, together with the inspector’s testimony, is evidence the court may adopt when giving its decision, unless the contrary is proved to it, under article 134, third. That rule assigns the report a place in the evidence. It does not prevent the employer from putting forward what rebuts its meaning or explains its circumstances. Elements of the employer’s procedural position include what earlier articles already draw: that the committee is to notify its presence unless notice would undermine the assignment; that the source of a complaint is kept confidential; that committee members must have no interest in the project; and that professional secrets are not disclosed. Preventing the committee from entering workplaces or from performing its duties, or obstructing its work, is conduct for which article 135 provides imprisonment or a fine; the amount of the fine is read from the text in force.
After the judgment becomes final, the employer must remove the effects of the violation for which judgment was given, within sixty days of that date. If the convicted person repeats the violation, the penalty imposed under this Law is doubled, under article 169. That time-limit runs from the date the judgment becomes final, not from the date of the visit alone.
This supervisory path is independent of referring a dispute over existing rights to the Department of Employment and Loans and then to the Court of Labor, which is explained in How is a labour dispute taken to the Department before the Court of Labor?. The committee’s composition and powers of entry are in Labour inspection and the powers of the inspection committee.
What should the employer review in this procedural position?
The file may ask: was presence notified during the visit, or was the exception the text allows used? Was a written request issued with a specified period for remedy, and has that period expired? Was a warning issued by the Minister before referral? Is the path a referral to the Court of Labor, the initiation of a criminal case, or both, within what the Minister decides on the basis of the report? Is there anything in the report or in the inspector’s testimony that can be shown to the court to be otherwise? If a closure or stoppage was ordered, has its cause been removed? After judgment: has it become final, and has the sixty-day period for removing the effects been observed?
Legal basis and sources
Frequently asked questions
Is the Minister’s warning required before every referral to the Court of Labor?
Article 134 states that the Minister may address a warning to the defaulting employer before referring the employer to the Court of Labor. The wording authorises that warning in that place, and bases referral or the initiation of a criminal case on the committee’s report or recommendation. The particular case is read according to whatever warning or report was issued in it, without a generalisation the text does not make.
What weight does the inspection report have before the Court of Labor?
Article 134, third, treats the committee’s report together with the inspector’s testimony as evidence the court may adopt when giving its decision, unless the contrary is proved to it. The evidential weight therefore stands unless the contrary is proved before the Court of Labor.
When does the sixty-day period for removing the effects of the violation begin?
Article 169 ties the period to the date the judgment becomes final, not to the date of the inspection visit alone. If the convicted person repeats the violation, the person is punished with double the penalty imposed under this Law.
Related topics and articles
- 01Labour inspection and the powers of the inspection committeePowers of labour inspection committees under articles 126–133 of Labour Law 37/2015: unannounced entry, records, and sampling.
- 02How is a labour dispute taken to the Department before the Court of Labor?Referring a labour dispute to the Department of Employment and Loans and then to the Court of Labor, reading articles 157 and 168 of Law 37/2015 together.
- 03The employer’s occupational safety and health dutiesEmployer and worker occupational safety duties under articles 113–123 of Labour Law 37/2015, and the role of the National Center.
- 04End-of-service entitlements under Labour Law No. 37 of 2015The end-of-service gratuity under Labour Law 37/2015: the two-week formula, the statutory exceptions, and how it differs from benefits under Law 18/2023.
- 05Which labour and social-security rules apply in the governorates and in the Kurdistan Region?The reach of Labour Law 37/2015 and Law 18/2023 in the governorates not organised in a region, and how work is organised in the Kurdistan Region.