Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 251287 / 251,287

Articles

Browse latest releases

Browse by creation date

Browse by origin

A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z

Browse by tag

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
AEMR ASEC AMGT AE AS AMED AVIAN AU AF AORC AGENDA AO AR AM APER AFIN ATRN AJ ABUD ARABL AL AG AODE ALOW ADANA AADP AND APECO ACABQ ASEAN AA AFFAIRS AID AGR AY AGS AFSI AGOA AMB ARF ANET ASCH ACOA AFLU AFSN AMEX AFDB ABLD AESC AFGHANISTAN AINF AVIATION ARR ARSO ANDREW ASSEMBLY AIDS APRC ASSK ADCO ASIG AC AZ APEC AFINM ADB AP ACOTA ASEX ACKM ASUP ANTITERRORISM ADPM AINR ARABLEAGUE AGAO AORG AMTC AIN ACCOUNT ASECAFINGMGRIZOREPTU AIDAC AINT ARCH AMGTKSUP ALAMI AMCHAMS ALJAZEERA AVIANFLU AORD AOREC ALIREZA AOMS AMGMT ABDALLAH AORCAE AHMED ACCELERATED AUC ALZUGUREN ANGEL AORL ASECIR AMG AMBASSADOR AEMRASECCASCKFLOMARRPRELPINRAMGTJMXL ADM ASES ABMC AER AMER ASE AMGTHA ARNOLDFREDERICK AOPC ACS AFL AEGR ASED AFPREL AGRI AMCHAM ARNOLD AN ANATO AME APERTH ASECSI AT ACDA ASEDC AIT AMERICA AMLB AMGE ACTION AGMT AFINIZ ASECVE ADRC ABER AGIT APCS AEMED ARABBL ARC ASO AIAG ACEC ASR ASECM ARG AEC ABT ADIP ADCP ANARCHISTS AORCUN AOWC ASJA AALC AX AROC ARM AGENCIES ALBE AK AZE AOPR AREP AMIA ASCE ALANAZI ABDULRAHMEN ABDULHADI AINFCY ARMS ASECEFINKCRMKPAOPTERKHLSAEMRNS AGRICULTURE AFPK AOCR ALEXANDER ATRD ATFN ABLG AORCD AFGHAN ARAS AORCYM AVERY ALVAREZ ACBAQ ALOWAR ANTOINE ABLDG ALAB AMERICAS AFAF ASECAFIN ASEK ASCC AMCT AMGTATK AMT APDC AEMRS ASECE AFSA ATRA ARTICLE ARENA AISG AEMRBC AFR AEIR ASECAF AFARI AMPR ASPA ASOC ANTONIO AORCL ASECARP APRM AUSTRALIAGROUP ASEG AFOR AEAID AMEDI ASECTH ASIC AFDIN AGUIRRE AUNR ASFC AOIC ANTXON ASA ASECCASC ALI AORCEUNPREFPRELSMIGBN ASECKHLS ASSSEMBLY ASECVZ AI ASECPGOV ASIR ASCEC ASAC ARAB AIEA ADMIRAL AUSGR AQ AMTG ARRMZY ANC APR AMAT AIHRC AFU ADEL AECL ACAO AMEMR ADEP AV AW AOR ALL ALOUNI AORCUNGA ALNEA ASC AORCO ARMITAGE AGENGA AGRIC AEM ACOAAMGT AGUILAR AFPHUM AMEDCASCKFLO AFZAL AAA ATPDEA ASECPHUM ASECKFRDCVISKIRFPHUMSMIGEG
ETRD ETTC EU ECON EFIN EAGR EAID ELAB EINV ENIV ENRG EPET EZ ELTN ELECTIONS ECPS ET ER EG EUN EIND ECONOMICS EMIN ECIN EINT EWWT EAIR EN ENGR ES EI ETMIN EL EPA EARG EFIS ECONOMY EC EK ELAM ECONOMIC EAR ESDP ECCP ELN EUM EUMEM ECA EAP ELEC ECOWAS EFTA EXIM ETTD EDRC ECOSOC ECPSN ENVIRONMENT ECO EMAIL ECTRD EREL EDU ENERG ENERGY ENVR ETRAD EAC EXTERNAL EFIC ECIP ERTD EUC ENRGMO EINZ ESTH ECCT EAGER ECPN ELNT ERD EGEN ETRN EIVN ETDR EXEC EIAD EIAR EVN EPRT ETTF ENGY EAIDCIN EXPORT ETRC ESA EIB EAPC EPIT ESOCI ETRB EINDQTRD ENRC EGOV ECLAC EUR ELF ETEL ENRGUA EVIN EARI ESCAP EID ERIN ELAN ENVT EDEV EWWY EXBS ECOM EV ELNTECON ECE ETRDGK EPETEIND ESCI ETRDAORC EAIDETRD ETTR EMS EAGRECONEINVPGOVBN EBRD EUREM ERGR EAGRBN EAUD EFI ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS EPEC ETRO ENRGY EGAR ESSO EGAD ENV ENER EAIDXMXAXBXFFR ELA EET EINVETRD EETC EIDN ERGY ETRDPGOV EING EMINCG EINVECON EURM EEC EICN EINO EPSC ELAP ELABPGOVBN EE ESPS ETRA ECONETRDBESPAR ERICKSON EEOC EVENTS EPIN EB ECUN EPWR ENG EX EH EAIDAR EAIS ELBA EPETUN ETRDEIQ EENV ECPC ETRP ECONENRG EUEAID EWT EEB EAIDNI ESENV EADM ECN ENRGKNNP ETAD ETR ECONETRDEAGRJA ETRG ETER EDUC EITC EBUD EAIF EBEXP EAIDS EITI EGOVSY EFQ ECOQKPKO ETRGY ESF EUE EAIC EPGOV ENFR EAGRE ENRD EINTECPS EAVI ETC ETCC EIAID EAIDAF EAGREAIDPGOVPRELBN EAOD ETRDA EURN EASS EINVA EAIDRW EON ECOR EPREL EGPHUM ELTM ECOS EINN ENNP EUPGOV EAGRTR ECONCS ETIO ETRDGR EAIDB EISNAR EIFN ESPINOSA EAIDASEC ELIN EWTR EMED ETFN ETT EADI EPTER ELDIN EINVEFIN ESS ENRGIZ EQRD ESOC ETRDECD ECINECONCS EAIT ECONEAIR ECONEFIN EUNJ ENRGKNNPMNUCPARMPRELNPTIAEAJMXL ELAD EFIM ETIC EFND EFN ETLN ENGRD EWRG ETA EIN EAIRECONRP EXIMOPIC ERA ENRGJM ECONEGE ENVI ECHEVARRIA EMINETRD EAD ECONIZ EENG ELBR EWWC ELTD EAIDMG ETRK EIPR EISNLN ETEX EPTED EFINECONCS EPCS EAG ETRDKIPR ED EAIO ETRDEC ENRGPARMOTRASENVKGHGPGOVECONTSPLEAID ECONEINVEFINPGOVIZ ERNG EFINU EURFOR EWWI ELTNSNAR ETD EAIRASECCASCID EOXC ESTN EAIDAORC EAGRRP ETRDEMIN ELABPHUMSMIGKCRMBN ETRDEINVTINTCS EGHG EAIDPHUMPRELUG EAGRBTIOBEXPETRDBN EDA EPETPGOV ELAINE EUCOM EMW EFINECONEAIDUNGAGM ELB EINDETRD EMI ETRDECONWTOCS EINR ESTRADA EHUM EFNI ELABV ENR EMN EXO EWWTPRELPGOVMASSMARRBN EATO END EP EINVETC ECONEFINETRDPGOVEAGRPTERKTFNKCRMEAID ELTRN EIQ ETTW EAI ENGRG ETRED ENDURING ETTRD EAIDEGZ EOCN EINF EUPREL ENRL ECPO ENLT EEFIN EPPD ECOIN EUEAGR EISL EIDE ENRGSD EINVECONSENVCSJA EAIG ENTG EEPET EUNCH EPECO ETZ EPAT EPTE EAIRGM ETRDPREL EUNGRSISAFPKSYLESO ETTN EINVKSCA ESLCO EBMGT ENRGTRGYETRDBEXPBTIOSZ EFLU ELND EFINOECD EAIDHO EDUARDO ENEG ECONEINVETRDEFINELABETRDKTDBPGOVOPIC EFINTS ECONQH ENRGPREL EUNPHUM EINDIR EPE EMINECINECONSENVTBIONS EFINM ECRM EQ EWWTSP ECONPGOVBN
KFLO KPKO KDEM KFLU KTEX KMDR KPAO KCRM KIDE KN KNNP KG KMCA KZ KJUS KWBG KU KDMR KAWC KCOR KPAL KOMC KTDB KTIA KISL KHIV KHUM KTER KCFE KTFN KS KIRF KTIP KIRC KSCA KICA KIPR KPWR KWMN KE KGIC KGIT KSTC KACT KSEP KFRD KUNR KHLS KCRS KRVC KUWAIT KVPR KSRE KMPI KMRS KNRV KNEI KCIP KSEO KITA KDRG KV KSUM KCUL KPET KBCT KO KSEC KOLY KNAR KGHG KSAF KWNM KNUC KMNP KVIR KPOL KOCI KPIR KLIG KSAC KSTH KNPT KINL KPRP KRIM KICC KIFR KPRV KAWK KFIN KT KVRC KR KHDP KGOV KPOW KTBT KPMI KPOA KRIF KEDEM KFSC KY KGCC KATRINA KWAC KSPR KTBD KBIO KSCI KRCM KNNB KBNC KIMT KCSY KINR KRAD KMFO KCORR KW KDEMSOCI KNEP KFPC KEMPI KBTR KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KNPP KTTB KTFIN KBTS KCOM KFTN KMOC KOR KDP KPOP KGHA KSLG KMCR KJUST KUM KMSG KHPD KREC KIPRTRD KPREL KEN KCSA KCRIM KGLB KAKA KWWT KUNP KCRN KISLPINR KLFU KUNC KEDU KCMA KREF KPAS KRKO KNNC KLHS KWAK KOC KAPO KTDD KOGL KLAP KECF KCRCM KNDP KSEAO KCIS KISM KREL KISR KISC KKPO KWCR KPFO KUS KX KWCI KRFD KWPG KTRD KH KLSO KEVIN KEANE KACW KWRF KNAO KETTC KTAO KWIR KVCORR KDEMGT KPLS KICT KWGB KIDS KSCS KIRP KSTCPL KDEN KLAB KFLOA KIND KMIG KPPAO KPRO KLEG KGKG KCUM KTTP KWPA KIIP KPEO KICR KNNA KMGT KCROM KMCC KLPM KNNPGM KSIA KSI KWWW KOMS KESS KMCAJO KWN KTDM KDCM KCM KVPRKHLS KENV KCCP KGCN KCEM KEMR KWMNKDEM KNNPPARM KDRM KWIM KJRE KAID KWMM KPAONZ KUAE KTFR KIF KNAP KPSC KSOCI KCWI KAUST KPIN KCHG KLBO KIRCOEXC KI KIRCHOFF KSTT KNPR KDRL KCFC KLTN KPAOKMDRKE KPALAOIS KESO KKOR KSMT KFTFN KTFM KDEMK KPKP KOCM KNN KISLSCUL KFRDSOCIRO KINT KRG KWMNSMIG KSTCC KPAOY KFOR KWPR KSEPCVIS KGIV KSEI KIL KWMNPHUMPRELKPAOZW KQ KEMS KHSL KTNF KPDD KANSOU KKIV KFCE KTTC KGH KNNNP KK KSCT KWNN KAWX KOMCSG KEIM KTSD KFIU KDTB KFGM KACP KWWMN KWAWC KSPA KGICKS KNUP KNNO KISLAO KTPN KSTS KPRM KPALPREL KPO KTLA KCRP KNMP KAWCK KCERS KDUM KEDM KTIALG KWUN KPTS KPEM KMEPI KAWL KHMN KCRO KCMR KPTD KCROR KMPT KTRF KSKN KMAC KUK KIRL KEM KSOC KBTC KOM KINP KDEMAF KTNBT KISK KRM KWBW KBWG KNNPMNUC KNOP KSUP KCOG KNET KWBC KESP KMRD KEBG KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KPWG KOMCCO KRGY KNNF KPROG KJAN KFRED KPOKO KM KWMNCS KMPF KJWC KJU KSMIG KALR KRAL KDGOV KPA KCRMJA KCRI KAYLA KPGOV KRD KNNPCH KFEM KPRD KFAM KALM KIPRETRDKCRM KMPP KADM KRFR KMWN KWRG KTIAPARM KTIAEUN KRDP KLIP KDDEM KTIAIC KWKN KPAD KDM KRCS KWBGSY KEAI KIVP KPAOPREL KUNH KTSC KIPT KNP KJUSTH KGOR KEPREL KHSA KGHGHIV KNNR KOMH KRCIM KWPB KWIC KINF KPER KILS KA KNRG KCSI KFRP KLFLO KFE KNPPIS KQM KQRDQ KERG KPAOPHUM KSUMPHUM KVBL KARIM KOSOVO KNSD KUIR KWHG KWBGXF KWMNU KPBT KKNP KERF KCRT KVIS KWRC KVIP KTFS KMARR KDGR KPAI KDE KTCRE KMPIO KUNRAORC KHOURY KAWS KPAK KOEM KCGC KID KVRP KCPS KIVR KBDS KWOMN KIIC KTFNJA KARZAI KMVP KHJUS KPKOUNSC KMAR KIBL KUNA KSA KIS KJUSAF KDEV KPMO KHIB KIRD KOUYATE KIPRZ KBEM KPAM KDET KPPD KOSCE KJUSKUNR KICCPUR KRMS KWMNPREL KWMJN KREISLER KWM KDHS KRV KPOV KWMNCI KMPL KFLD KWWN KCVM KIMMITT KCASC KOMO KNATO KDDG KHGH KRF KSCAECON KWMEN KRIC
PREL PINR PGOV PHUM PTER PE PREF PARM PBTS PINS PHSA PK PL PM PNAT PHAS PO PROP PGOVE PA PU POLITICAL PPTER POL PALESTINIAN PHUN PIN PAMQ PPA PSEC POLM PBIO PSOE PDEM PAK PF PKAO PGOVPRELMARRMOPS PMIL PV POLITICS PRELS POLICY PRELHA PIRN PINT PGOG PERSONS PRC PEACE PROCESS PRELPGOV PROV PFOV PKK PRE PT PIRF PSI PRL PRELAF PROG PARMP PERL PUNE PREFA PP PGOB PUM PROTECTION PARTIES PRIL PEL PAGE PS PGO PCUL PLUM PIF PGOVENRGCVISMASSEAIDOPRCEWWTBN PMUC PCOR PAS PB PKO PY PKST PTR PRM POUS PRELIZ PGIC PHUMS PAL PNUC PLO PMOPS PHM PGOVBL PBK PELOSI PTE PGOVAU PNR PINSO PRO PLAB PREM PNIR PSOCI PBS PD PHUML PERURENA PKPA PVOV PMAR PHUMCF PUHM PHUH PRELPGOVETTCIRAE PRT PROPERTY PEPFAR PREI POLUN PAR PINSF PREFL PH PREC PPD PING PQL PINSCE PGV PREO PRELUN POV PGOVPHUM PINRES PRES PGOC PINO POTUS PTERE PRELKPAO PRGOV PETR PGOVEAGRKMCAKNARBN PPKO PARLIAMENT PEPR PMIG PTBS PACE PETER PMDL PVIP PKPO POLMIL PTEL PJUS PHUMNI PRELKPAOIZ PGOVPREL POGV PEREZ POWELL PMASS PDOV PARN PG PPOL PGIV PAIGH PBOV PETROL PGPV PGOVL POSTS PSO PRELEU PRELECON PHUMPINS PGOVKCMABN PQM PRELSP PRGO PATTY PRELPGOVEAIDECONEINVBEXPSCULOIIPBTIO PGVO PROTESTS PRELPLS PKFK PGOVEAIDUKNOSWGMHUCANLLHFRSPITNZ PARAGRAPH PRELGOV POG PTRD PTERM PBTSAG PHUMKPAL PRELPK PTERPGOV PAO PRIVATIZATION PSCE PPAO PGOVPRELPHUMPREFSMIGELABEAIDKCRMKWMN PARALYMPIC PRUM PKPRP PETERS PAHO PARMS PGREL PINV POINS PHUMPREL POREL PRELNL PHUMPGOV PGOVQL PLAN PRELL PARP PROVE PSOC PDD PRELNP PRELBR PKMN PGKV PUAS PRELTBIOBA PBTSEWWT PTERIS PGOVU PRELGG PHUMPRELPGOV PFOR PEPGOV PRELUNSC PRAM PICES PTERIZ PREK PRELEAGR PRELEUN PHUME PHU PHUMKCRS PRESL PRTER PGOF PARK PGOVSOCI PTERPREL PGOVEAID PGOVPHUMKPAO PINSKISL PREZ PGOVAF PARMEUN PECON PINL POGOV PGOVLO PIERRE PRELPHUM PGOVPZ PGOVKCRM PBST PKPAO PHUMHUPPS PGOVPOL PASS PPGOV PROGV PAGR PHALANAGE PARTY PRELID PGOVID PHUMR PHSAQ PINRAMGT PSA PRELM PRELMU PIA PINRPE PBTSRU PARMIR PEDRO PNUK PVPR PINOCHET PAARM PRFE PRELEIN PINF PCI PSEPC PGOVSU PRLE PDIP PHEM PRELB PORG PGGOC POLG POPDC PGOVPM PWMN PDRG PHUMK PINB PRELAL PRER PFIN PNRG PRED POLI PHUMBO PHYTRP PROLIFERATION PHARM PUOS PRHUM PUNR PENA PGOVREL PETRAEUS PGOVKDEM PGOVENRG PHUS PRESIDENT PTERKU PRELKSUMXABN PGOVSI PHUMQHA PKISL PIR PGOVZI PHUMIZNL PKNP PRELEVU PMIN PHIM PHUMBA PUBLIC PHAM PRELKPKO PMR PARTM PPREL PN PROL PDA PGOVECON PKBL PKEAID PERM PRELEZ PRELC PER PHJM PGOVPRELPINRBN PRFL PLN PWBG PNG PHUMA PGOR PHUMPTER POLINT PPEF PKPAL PNNL PMARR PAC PTIA PKDEM PAUL PREG PTERR PTERPRELPARMPGOVPBTSETTCEAIRELTNTC PRELJA POLS PI PNS PAREL PENV PTEROREP PGOVM PINER PBGT PHSAUNSC PTERDJ PRELEAID PARMIN PKIR PLEC PCRM PNET PARR PRELETRD PRELBN PINRTH PREJ PEACEKEEPINGFORCES PEMEX PRELZ PFLP PBPTS PTGOV PREVAL PRELSW PAUM PRF PHUMKDEM PATRICK PGOVKMCAPHUMBN PRELA PNUM PGGV PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA PBT PIND PTEP PTERKS PGOVJM PGOT PRELMARR PGOVCU PREV PREFF PRWL PET PROB PRELPHUMP PHUMAF PVTS PRELAFDB PSNR PGOVECONPRELBU PGOVZL PREP PHUMPRELBN PHSAPREL PARCA PGREV PGOVDO PGON PCON PODC PRELOV PHSAK PSHA PGOVGM PRELP POSCE PGOVPTER PHUMRU PINRHU PARMR PGOVTI PPEL PMAT PAN PANAM PGOVBO PRELHRC

Browse by classification

Community resources

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 10ANTANANARIVO105, MADAGASCAR: CHILD LABOR AND FORCED LABOR FOR DOL

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs

Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
  • The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
  • The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
  • The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #10ANTANANARIVO105.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
10ANTANANARIVO105 2010-02-25 04:21 2011-08-30 01:44 UNCLASSIFIED Embassy Antananarivo
VZCZCXYZ0000
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHAN #0105/01 0560421
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 250421Z FEB 10
FM AMEMBASSY ANTANANARIVO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 3352
RUEHC/DEPT OF LABOR WASHDC
INFO RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 0109
UNCLAS ANTANANARIVO 000105 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR DRL/ILCSR FOR SARAH MORGAN 
G/TIP FOR LUIS CDEBACA 
AF/E FOR JAMES LIDDLE 
DOL/ILAB FOR LEYLA STROTKAMP, RACHEL RIGBY, TINA MCCARTER 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ELAB EIND ETRD PHUM SOCI KTIP MA
SUBJECT: MADAGASCAR: CHILD LABOR AND FORCED LABOR FOR DOL 
CONGRESSIONAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 
 
REF: 09 STATE 131995 
 
1. SUMMARY: Madagascar's ongoing political crisis, which began in 
December 2008, has severely diminished the government's ability to 
address a wide range of social problems, including child labor and 
forced labor.  The most recent reliable data specific to this 
subject remains the 2007 national survey on child labor from 
ILO/IPEC, but anecdotal evidence suggests that any recent gains were 
likely erased by the crisis of 2009.  Trade and investment have 
shrunk, unemployment has risen, and the government has had to adapt 
to substantial cuts in direct budget assistance from the IMF and EU 
members in December 2008, followed by reduced development assistance 
after the March 2009 military-backed coup.  Predictably, the crisis 
has disproportionately affected Madagascar's most vulnerable 
populations, although reliable statistics on the subject remain 
unavailable.  This cable responds to reftel tasking concerning the 
Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA) of 2005, 
and the Trade and Development Act (TDA) of 2000.  Responses in 
paragraphs 2 (TVPRA) and 3 (TDA) are keyed to questions as presented 
in reftel. END SUMMARY. 
 
2. TASKING 1/TVPRA: Information on the use of forced labor and/or 
exploitive child labor in the production of goods. 
 
In consultation with local NGO contacts, post has identified the 
following 11 specific goods as being produced with 
exploitive/hazardous child labor.  This list is not exhaustive; 
given the extent of child labor in Madagascar, Post focused on 
specific goods of which we had personal knowledge, or for which we 
could rely on the personal experience of trusted NGO contacts. 
There are, most likely, many more goods produced, to some extent, 
with child labor. 
 
1/A) GOOD: Wine 
B) TYPE OF EXPLOITATION FOUND IN THE PRODUCTION OF THE GOOD: 
Exploitive/hazardous child labor 
C) SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND YEARS: PACT (2009) 
D) NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION: Children as young as 11 to 13 years old 
are responsible for harvesting grapes used in wines produced in the 
region of Haute Matsiatra (mainly in Ambalavao).  Children are only 
involved on small farms, and do not play a role once the grapes have 
been sold to actual wine producers. 
E) PREVALENCE: Statistics are unavailable. 
F) HOST GOVERNMENT/AUTHORITIES, INDUSTRY, OR NGO EFFORTS 
SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO COMBAT FORCED LABOR OF ADULTS OR CHILDREN 
IN THE PRODUCTION OF GOODS: The GOM, with PACT Madagascar, through 
its program KILONGA, have targeted the Association of Winegrowers 
with information and education campaigns, resulting in a commitment 
on their part to make an effort to stop recruiting children. 
Despite this commitment, they recognize that while industrial farms 
do not directly recruit children, children continue to work in 
family vineyards, which are the wine industry's main source of 
grapes. 
 
2/A) GOOD: Tea 
B) TYPE OF EXPLOITATION FOUND IN THE PRODUCTION OF THE GOOD: 
Exploitive/hazardous child labor 
C) SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND YEARS: PACT (2009), Internet sources 
D) NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION: Children aged 11 to 13 are involved in the 
harvesting and the transport of tea leaves from the plantations. 
Malagasy tea plantations are located in the village of Sahambavy 
(Fianarantsoa, Haute-Matsiatra region), with a surface area of about 
330 hectares, of which 94 hectares are managed by local farmers. 
Children are often asked to carry up to 50 kilos of tea leaves on 
their backs, and are also employed to spray fertilizer. 
E) PREVALENCE: It is difficult to provide statistics, but up to 500 
seasonal staffers are hired during the peak season of October to 
April for harvesting.  Eighty percent of the tea produced in this 
region is reportedly destined for export, mainly to Kenya. Working 
children are paid fifteen ariary (USD 0.007) per kilo of tea 
leaves. 
F) HOST GOVERNMENT/AUTHORITIES, INDUSTRY, OR NGO EFFORTS 
SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO COMBAT FORCED LABOR OF ADULTS OR CHILDREN 
IN THE PRODUCTION OF GOODS: PACT is conducting an education and 
information campaign through their Kilonga project, in order to 
promote the reinsertion of working children into the school system. 
 
3/A) GOOD: Cocoa 
B) TYPE OF EXPLOITATION FOUND IN THE PRODUCTION OF THE GOOD: 
Exploitive/hazardous child labor 
C) SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND YEARS: PACT (2009) 
D) NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION: Young boys aged from 10 to 12 in Ambanja 
(Diana region) work to harvest cocoa by climbing up cocoa trees. 
Young girls join them later to sell the products in the local 
markets, sometimes for export.  Production peaks in June-July and in 
October-November. 
 
E) PREVALENCE: More than 90 percent of the national cocoa supply is 
produced in Ambanja and the Sambirano region, primarily by family 
farms for export.  Internet sources indicate that the country 
produces up to 4,000 tons of cocoa per year from its 1,700ha of 
plantations, for export mainly to European countries including 
Germany, the Netherlands, France, and Belgium, and to South Africa. 
 
F) HOST GOVERNMENT/AUTHORITIES, INDUSTRY, OR NGO EFFORTS 
SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO COMBAT FORCED LABOR OF ADULTS OR CHILDREN 
IN THE PRODUCTION OF GOODS: PACT is conducting an education and 
information campaign through their Kilonga project, in order to 
promote the reinsertion of working children into the school system. 
 
4/A) GOOD: Oysters 
B) TYPE OF EXPLOITATION FOUND IN THE PRODUCTION OF THE GOOD: 
Exploitive/hazardous child labor 
C) SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND YEARS: PACT (2009) 
D) NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION: Children are directly engaged in 
collecting oysters, for consumption in local restaurants or sale in 
markets. 
E) PREVALENCE: Statistics are unavailable. 
F) HOST GOVERNMENT/AUTHORITIES, INDUSTRY, OR NGO EFFORTS 
SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO COMBAT FORCED LABOR OF ADULTS OR CHILDREN 
IN THE PRODUCTION OF GOODS: Post is not aware of any specific 
efforts to combat this practice. 
 
5/A) GOOD: Essential oils 
B) TYPE OF EXPLOITATION FOUND IN THE PRODUCTION OF THE GOOD: 
Exploitive/hazardous child labor 
C) SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND YEARS: PACT (2009) 
D) NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION: Children aged as young as 11 to 13 are 
paid MGA 37 (USD 0.017) per kilo of medicinal plant leaves harvested 
and transported for the production of essential oils in the region 
of Haute Matsiatra.  Most essential oils are destined for the export 
market. 
E) PREVALENCE: No exact statistics are available, but PACT's general 
assessment notes that child labor mostly occurs in family farms or 
plantations. 
F) HOST GOVERNMENT/AUTHORITIES, INDUSTRY, OR NGO EFFORTS 
SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO COMBAT FORCED LABOR OF ADULTS OR CHILDREN 
IN THE PRODUCTION OF GOODS: PACT is conducting an education and 
information campaign through their Kilonga project, in order to 
promote the reinsertion of working children into the school system. 
 
6/A) GOOD: Cotton 
B) TYPE OF EXPLOITATION FOUND IN THE PRODUCTION OF THE GOOD: 
Exploitive/hazardous child labor 
C) SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND YEARS: PACT (2009) 
D) NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION: Girls as young as 8 to 10 years old are 
working in cotton plantations in the Diana region, primarily around 
the city of Ambilobe. Cotton is produced for local textile factories 
and the export market. 
E) PREVALENCE: Statistics are unavailable. 
F) HOST GOVERNMENT/AUTHORITIES, INDUSTRY, OR NGO EFFORTS 
SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO COMBAT FORCED LABOR OF ADULTS OR CHILDREN 
IN THE PRODUCTION OF GOODS: PACT is conducting an education and 
information campaign through their Kilonga project, in order to 
promote the reinsertion of working children into the school system. 
 
7/A) GOOD: Baskets 
B) TYPE OF EXPLOITATION FOUND IN THE PRODUCTION OF THE GOOD: 
Exploitive/hazardous child labor 
C) SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND YEARS: PACT (2009) 
D) NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION: Young girls aged 14 to 15 in Foulpointe 
(Atsinanana region) are involved in basket-weaving and in the dyeing 
of raffia, which is used as raw materials for the baskets.  Goods 
are primarily intended for both local consumption and foreign 
tourists. 
E) PREVALENCE: Statistics are unavailable; baskets are made in many 
locations around the country, but PACT's research was limited to 
seven target regions, and child labor was only found in Atsinanana 
region for this particular good. 
F) HOST GOVERNMENT/AUTHORITIES, INDUSTRY, OR NGO EFFORTS 
SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO COMBAT FORCED LABOR OF ADULTS OR CHILDREN 
IN THE PRODUCTION OF GOODS: PACT is conducting an education and 
information campaign through their Kilonga project, in order to 
promote the reinsertion of working children into the school system. 
 
8/A) GOOD: Gravel 
B) TYPE OF EXPLOITATION FOUND IN THE PRODUCTION OF THE GOOD: 
Exploitive/hazardous child labor 
C) SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND YEARS: PACT (2009) 
D) NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION: In the Diana region, children start 
working in stone quarrying as early as age 7, while those from the 
Atsinanana region start later at the age of 9 to 11.  Child labor 
has also been observed in this sector in the Androy region.  Whole 
 
families often work in one quarry, with children helping their 
parents. 
E) PREVALENCE: Statistics are unavailable. 
F) HOST GOVERNMENT/AUTHORITIES, INDUSTRY, OR NGO EFFORTS 
SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO COMBAT FORCED LABOR OF ADULTS OR CHILDREN 
IN THE PRODUCTION OF GOODS: PACT is conducting an education and 
information campaign through their Kilonga project, in order to 
promote the reinsertion of working children into the school system. 
 
9/A) GOOD: Vanilla 
B) TYPE OF EXPLOITATION FOUND IN THE PRODUCTION OF THE GOOD: 
Exploitive/hazardous child labor 
C) SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND YEARS: PACT (2009) 
D) NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION: Children aged 9 to 17 are working at all 
stages in the production of vanilla around the town of Sambava. 
They start in harvesting, but also participate in processing, 
especially on family farms. 
E) PREVALENCE: PACT statistics show that 20 to 30 percent of the 
harvesting is done by children. 
F) HOST GOVERNMENT/AUTHORITIES, INDUSTRY, OR NGO EFFORTS 
SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO COMBAT FORCED LABOR OF ADULTS OR CHILDREN 
IN THE PRODUCTION OF GOODS: PACT is conducting an education and 
information campaign through their Kilonga project, in order to 
promote the reinsertion of working children into the school system. 
 
10/A) GOOD: Copra (the dried meat, or kernel, of the coconut) 
B) TYPE OF EXPLOITATION FOUND IN THE PRODUCTION OF THE GOOD: 
Exploitive/hazardous child labor 
C) SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND YEARS: PACT (2009) 
D) NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION: Children aged 9 to 17 are harvesting copra 
in the SAVA region.  While harvesting is the most visible part of 
child labor in the copra producing, PACT suspects that children are 
involved in all of the processing phases.  Further evidence of this 
was unavailable, however, due to the fact that copra processing is 
done inside family homes. 
E) PREVALENCE: Statistics are unavailable. 
F) HOST GOVERNMENT/AUTHORITIES, INDUSTRY, OR NGO EFFORTS 
SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO COMBAT FORCED LABOR OF ADULTS OR CHILDREN 
IN THE PRODUCTION OF GOODS: PACT is conducting an education and 
information campaign through their Kilonga project, in order to 
promote the reinsertion of working children into the school system. 
 
11/A) GOOD: Bricks 
B) TYPE OF EXPLOITATION FOUND IN THE PRODUCTION OF THE GOOD: 
Exploitive/hazardous child labor 
C) SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND YEARS: PACT (2009) 
D) NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION: Children aged 8 to 14 are engaged in the 
transport of bricks from the rice fields where bricks are made to 
either the trucks or a construction site in the Analamanga region. 
Generally, their parents are already working on making the bricks 
and they contribute by transporting the bricks. 
E) PREVALENCE: Statistics are unavailable. 
F) HOST GOVERNMENT/AUTHORITIES, INDUSTRY, OR NGO EFFORTS 
SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO COMBAT FORCED LABOR OF ADULTS OR CHILDREN 
IN THE PRODUCTION OF GOODS: PACT is conducting an education and 
information campaign through their Kilonga project, in order to 
promote the reinsertion of working children into the school system. 
 
3. TASKING 2/TDA: Information on exploitive child labor. 
 
2A) PREVALENCE AND SECTORAL DISTRIBUTION OF EXPLOITIVE CHILD LABOR 
 
1. In what sectors (not related to the production of goods) were 
children involved in exploitive labor (such as domestic service, 
street vending, and/or child prostitution)? 
 
The 2007 National Survey on Child Labor in Madagascar (ENTE in its 
French acronym, produced jointly by the ILO and the GOM with 2007 
data, and published in December 2008) identified significant amounts 
of child labor in agriculture, livestock, fishing, domestic labor, 
commerce, food service, manufacturing, and mining.  Agriculture, 
livestock, and fishing account for 85.6 percent of total child 
laborers, but domestic work and commerce (including food services) 
account for sizable numbers of child laborers not related to the 
production of goods: 6 percent and 4 percent, respectively.  Smaller 
numbers are involved in child prostitution in limited areas, but the 
ENTE does not provide data on them. 
 
2. Posts are requested to determine if the government collected or 
published data on exploitive child labor during the period, and if 
so, whether the government would provide the data set to DOL for 
further analysis. 
 
The 2007 ENTE (see 2A para 1) remains the most recent comprehensive 
survey on child labor in Madagascar.  In 2009, Madagascar completed 
Phase I (the first five years) of its 15-year National Action Plan 
 
to Fight Child Labor (PNALTE), which spans 2004 to 2019.  An 
assessment done for the PNALTE counted 17,000 children as prevented 
from working and 9,000 as withdrawn from the work environment since 
2004, largely under the ILO/IPEC Timebound Program that covered the 
same period.  This assessment also provided initial goals for Phase 
II (2010-2015), but these have not yet been published.  Post has 
been unable to obtain a copy of this assessment, but will provide it 
to DOS and DOL once it is available. 
 
2B) LAWS AND REGULATIONS: 
 
1. What new laws or regulations were enacted in regard to exploitive 
child labor over the past year?  If applicable, were the changes 
improvements in the legal and regulatory framework? 
 
No new laws have been enacted over the past year.  Parliament has 
been suspended since March 2009, following the coup, and no other 
branch of government has taken any initiative on child labor in its 
absence.  A draft bill on the prevention of WFCL-related violations 
was reportedly examined in January 2009, but no further action was 
taken due to the crisis. 
 
2. Based on the standards in paras 27 and 28, was the 
country/territory's legal and regulatory framework adequate for 
addressing exploitive child labor? 
 
Madagascar has an adequate legal framework for addressing exploitive 
child labor, but does not have the capacity or resources to 
effectively implement or enforce its international commitments or 
domestic agenda.  A series of laws and decrees from 2003 to 2007, 
and the PNALTE, have effectively translated Madagascar's 
international commitments into domestic policy, but have not yet had 
a significant impact on the problem itself.  According to local NGO 
contacts, the draft bill that was discussed in January 2009 (see 2B 
para 1) would have made a difference in the fight against exploitive 
child labor by providing for more effective implementation and 
enforcement than currently exists. 
 
2C) INSTITUTIONS AND MECHANISMS FOR ENFORCEMENT - HAZARDOUS CHILD 
LABOR AND FORCED CHILD LABOR: 
 
Although reftel requests separate sections concerning "hazardous" 
and "forced" child labor, the GOM does not effectively discern 
between the two in terms of institutions and mechanisms for 
enforcement, and Post was thus unable to provide substantially 
different responses to this distinction.  Both elements of child 
labor are included in the following 14 answers. 
 
1. What agency or agencies was/were responsible for the enforcement 
of laws relating to hazardous/forced child labor? 
 
The Ministry of Labor (MOL) has the lead in the fight against child 
labor, through its Office of Labor and the Promotion of Fundamental 
Rights.  This office provides the secretariat for the National 
Committee to Fight Child Labor (CNLTE), which is in turn supported 
by the Division for the Prevention, Abolition, and Monitoring of 
Child Labor (PACTE). 
 
The National Committee to Fight Child Labor (CNLTE) is an 
inter-ministerial committee (working with the ministries of health, 
education, and justice) created in 2004 to pursue and monitor the 
implementation of the National Action Plan to Fight Child Labor 
(PNALTE).  It coordinates with ILO/IPEC programs, provides input on 
legislation and regulations on child labor, and supports civil 
society on related projects.  There are also Regional Committees to 
Fight Child Labor (CRLTE), subordinate to the CNLTE, in nine (out of 
22) regions. 
 
The Division for the Prevention, Abolition, and Monitoring of Child 
Labor (PACTE), which supports the CNLTE, is specifically charged 
with the actual coordination, monitoring, and evaluation of all 
activities in the framework of the fight against child labor.  It is 
also responsible for communicating information related to child 
labor, and conducting research and development of activities to 
promote the fight against child labor. 
 
Additionally, there are five Regional Observatories for Child Labor 
(ORTE), created in 2007.  They work on a regional basis in concert 
with PACTE, with a similar focus on inter-ministerial coordination, 
monitoring, research, analysis, and outreach. 
 
UNICEF has been instrumental in creating commune-level "Child 
Protection Networks" in 761 communes (out of 1,640 in Madagascar), 
which serve as local focal points for cooperation been national and 
local government, as well as NGOs/CSOs working in this field. 
 
In 2001, prior to the creation of the PNALTE, the Ministry of Labor 
(in partnership with ILO, UNICEF, and PACT Madagascar) set up the 
Manjary Soa Center (CMS) in Antananarivo, in order to "improve the 
situation of child laborers in Madagacar".  It was designed to 
demonstrate the feasibility of fighting child labor through 
education and training programs that benefit the child victims, 
particularly those subjected to the worst forms of child labor.  To 
date, according to GOM statistics, 308 children have been withdrawn 
from child labor as a result.  The Center still exists today, and 
two additional ones were reportedly created in 2009, in Toliara and 
Toamasina.  The Centers are the only programs fully 
government-funded, along with the Regional Observatories of Child 
Labor.  No further plans for the creation of new centers have been 
established for 2010. 
 
2. If multiple agencies were responsible for enforcement, were there 
mechanisms for exchanging information? Assess their effectiveness. 
 
Per para 1, the MOL has the lead on child labor, but at various 
levels, they work with the ministries of health, education, and 
justice, as well as the police, gendarme, and regional government 
authorities.  Labor inspectors (from the MOL) and magistrates (from 
the MOJ) are in charge of enforcing laws on child labor, while 
NGO/CSO partners are often charged with monitoring and follow-up. 
 
The MOJ manages a Committee for the Reform of Children's Rights 
(CRDE), which is a mechanism to exchange information among the 
various actors involved in child labor.  The CRDE focuses on reforms 
to the legal framework for the fight against child labor. 
 
A local NGO contact stated that these mechanisms were insufficient, 
and will remain so until the draft bill from January 2009 (on 
enforcement and implementation) can be passed.  This continued delay 
has reportedly caused frustration among those in law enforcement as 
well, who are not sufficiently empowered or trained to deal 
effectively with child labor violations under the current framework. 
 
 
3. Did the country/territory maintain a mechanism for making 
complaints about hazardous/forced child labor violations?  If so, 
how many complaints were received in the reporting period? 
 
The Morals and Minors' Brigade, in the Gendarmerie, operates a 
toll-free hotline (dial 805) to anonymously report violations and 
the mistreatment of children.  At the local level, the inter-agency 
UNICEF-sponsored Child Protection Networks provide a mechanism to 
augment the limited capabilities of the formal labor inspectors. 
 
4. What amount of funding was provided to agencies responsible for 
inspections?  Was this amount adequate?  Did inspectors have 
sufficient office facilities, transportation, fuel, and other 
necessities to carry out inspections? 
 
PACTE reports that the Ministry of Labor's budget allocated to child 
labor has been reduced due to the crisis, although reliable numbers 
are not available.  This budget -- funded by the "Public Investment 
Program" (PIP) -- is divided up for the three Manjary Soa centers, 
which reportedly receive no outside funding.  This budget is grossly 
insufficient, and does not address the logistical or operational 
needs of even the few existing inspectors.  PACTE noted that the 
overall budget for child labor is difficult to assess, as this is a 
multi-sector program, funded separately by different departments, 
and they don't have firm numbers on the amounts allocated by the 
NGOs and international donors such as UNICEF and ILO. 
 
5. How many inspectors did the government employ?  Was the number of 
inspectors adequate? 
 
The government employs 71 labor inspectors countrywide (in a nation 
of over 20 million people), of which five focus on child labor. 
This number is not sufficient to address even formal sector needs, 
leaving the large informal labor market almost entirely outside the 
reach of government labor inspectors. 
 
6. How many inspections involving child labor were carried out? If 
possible, please provide breakdown of complaint-driven versus 
random, government-initiated inspections. Were inspections carried 
out in sectors in which children work? Was the number of inspections 
adequate? 
 
PACTE reports that no complaint-driven child-labor specific 
inspections have been conducted in 2009.  They stated, however, that 
child labor is evaluated during regular inspections, but were unable 
to provide statistics on these inspections or any incidents of child 
labor they uncovered. 
 
7. How many children were removed/assisted as a result of 
inspections?  Were these children actually provided or referred for 
services as a result (as opposed to simply fired)? 
 
This data was not available. 
 
8. How many child labor cases or "prosecutions" were opened? 
 
This data was not available. 
 
9. How many child labor cases were closed or resolved? 
 
This data was not available. 
 
10. How many violations were found or "convictions" reached? 
 
This data was not available. 
 
11. What is the average length of time it took to resolve child 
labor cases? 
 
This data was not available. 
 
12. In cases in which violations were found, were penalties actually 
applied, either through fines paid or jail sentence served? Did such 
sentences meet penalties established in the law? 
 
This data was not available. 
 
13. Did the experience regarding questions 7 through 10 above 
reflect a commitment to combat exploitive child labor? 
 
The fact that the GOM is unable to provide this data is indicative 
of its low technical capabilities and the apparent low priority that 
the GOM accords to these activities.  PACTE stated that the GOM has 
gotten "more involved in prevention, education, and information 
campaigns", but Post was unable to discern any measurable effect 
these efforts may have had on child labor in the country. 
 
According to a local NGO, much work remains to be done to develop 
the GOM's contribution to the fight against child labor.  Aside from 
financing the Manjary Soa Center (see para 2), and working to 
develop the PNALTE, the state doesn't directly finance any project 
in this domain.  The majority of the ministries involved in fighting 
child labor lack the budgetary discretion to launch their own 
initiatives.  This weak engagement presents a serious risk to the 
sustainability of activity once the donors eventually withdraw. 
 
14. Did government offer any training for investigators or others 
responsible for enforcement? If so, what (if any) impact have these 
trainings had? 
 
In 2008, the GOM conducted at least two workshops for labor 
inspectors, which reportedly resulted in "more regular" field visits 
to workplaces susceptible to child labor, although the lack of 
statistics on child labor inspections makes this statement difficult 
to evaluate.  Post has no indication of any such trainings in 2009. 
 
 
In February 2010, the ILO and the Ministry of Labor will organize a 
training and capacity-building workshop for labor inspectors, 
focusing on inspection techniques for evaluating child labor. 
 
2D) INSTITUTIONAL MECHANISMS FOR EFFECTIVE ENFORCEMENT - child 
trafficking, commercial sexual exploitation of children, use of 
children in illicit activities: 
 
2D, Section I: Child trafficking 
 
1. Did the country/territory have agencies or personnel dedicated to 
enforcement of child trafficking? How many investigators/social 
workers/dedicated police officers did the government employ to 
conduct investigations? If there were no dedicated agencies or 
personnel, provide an estimate of the number of people who were 
responsible for such investigations.  Was the number of 
investigators adequate? 
 
The GOM has 35 agents in the Morals and Minors Brigade of the 
National Police, which is in charge of all investigations related to 
minors.  These agents work within the Ministry of Internal Security, 
as well as the six former provincial capitals, and six additional 
areas considered "red zones", although PACTE did not provide the 
exact locations of the red zones.  Among these 35 agents, there are 
judicial police officers, police inspectors, and three social 
workers.  This number is insufficient, particularly given their 
broad mandate, the size of the problems they are charged with 
 
addressing, and the large territory for which they are responsible. 
 
 
2. How much funding was provided to agencies responsible for 
investigating child trafficking? Was this amount adequate? Did 
investigators have sufficient office facilities, transportation, 
fuel, and other necessities to carry out investigations? 
 
The budget for the Morals and Minors Brigade is part of the budget 
for the Judicial Police Directorate, and a detailed breakdown was 
not available.  Regardless of the amount, however, it is 
demonstrably insufficient, given the lack of personnel, training, 
equipment (especially information technology), and means of 
transportation. 
 
3. Did the country/territory maintain a hotline or other mechanism 
for reporting child trafficking?  If so, how many complaints were 
received in the reporting period? 
 
See Section 2C para 3 - "805" is the sole hotline, and accepts calls 
for all issues related to crimes involving minors. 
 
4. How many investigations were opened in regard to child 
trafficking? Was the number of investigations adequate? 
 
PACTE reports that 33 complaints of child trafficking were received 
and investigated in 2009.  While this 100 percent rate of response 
is impressive, it likely represents only a small portion of 
trafficking cases.  Anecdotal evidence from NGOs indicates a much 
larger problem, but no statistics are available to provide exact 
numbers.  In addition, Post's ability to query law enforcement 
bodies directly on this question was constrained by the fact that 
the USG does not recognize the de facto GOM; these numbers, and 
those in subsequent paragraphs, were provided by PACTE, which is 
located within the Ministry of Labor (see Section 2C para 1). 
 
5. How many children were rescued as a result? 
 
PACTE states that "in 80 percent of the kidnapping cases [which are 
a majority of the 33 reported cases in para 4], the child is saved". 
 
 
6. How many arrests were made or other kinds of prosecutions carried 
out? 
 
PACTE states that out of 33 investigations, 18 were closed, but they 
did not provide statistics on the outcome of these cases. 
 
7. How many cases were closed or resolved? 
 
See para 6.  No further details available. 
 
8. How many convictions? 
 
PACTE was unable to report any hard convictions, although at least 
seven suspects are currently in jail under a retaining writ, after 
having been denied bail.  They have not been convicted. 
 
9. Did sentences imposed meet standards established in the legal 
framework? 
 
Lacking any convictions, no data is available. 
 
10. Were sentences imposed actually served? 
 
No data available. 
 
11. What is the average length of time it takes to resolve cases of 
child trafficking? 
 
PACTE states that it can take as little as 48 hours for the Morals 
and Minors Brigade to "resolve" a case, although more complex cases 
"may need deeper investigations".  It is not clear how this 
statement squares with the low rates of closure, and the complete 
lack of convictions, nor how they define "resolving" a case. 
 
12. Did the government offer any training for investigators or 
others responsible for enforcement of child trafficking? If so, what 
was the impact (if any) of these trainings? 
 
The GOM offered several trainings in 2008 (see Section 2C para 14), 
but none in 2009.  NGO contacts indicate that labor inspectors 
subsequently made a concerted effort to conduct more field visits to 
workplaces susceptible to child labor, but this has not had a 
significant impact on their actual case statistics.  PACTE states 
that agents received further training on CSEC, sexual abuse, and 
 
communicating with children, conducted by UNICEF and NGOs, but this 
too was in 2008. 
 
13. If the country/territory experienced armed conflict during the 
reporting period or in the recent past involving the use of child 
soldiers, what actions were taken to penalize those responsible? 
Were these actions adequate or meaningful given the situation? 
 
Not applicable. 
 
2D, Section II: Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children 
 
1. Did the country/territory have agencies or personnel dedicated to 
enforcement of CSEC? How many investigators/social workers/dedicated 
police officers did the government employ to conduct investigations? 
If there were no dedicated agencies or personnel, provide an 
estimate of the number of people who were responsible for such 
investigations.  Was the number of investigators adequate? 
 
See 2D, Section I, para 1.  Madagascar deals with all forms of child 
exploitation and labor through the Morals and Minors Brigade of the 
Gendarme. 
 
2. How much funding was provided to agencies responsible for 
investigating CSEC in illicit activities? Was this amount adequate? 
Did investigators have sufficient office facilities, transportation, 
fuel, and other necessities to carry out investigations? 
 
See 2D, Section I, para 1. 
 
3. Did the country/territory maintain a hotline or other mechanism 
for reporting CSEC violations?  If so, how many complaints were 
received in the reporting period? 
 
See Section 2C para 3 - "805" is the sole hotline, and accepts calls 
for all issues related to crimes involving minors. 
 
4. How many investigations were opened in regard to CSEC? Was the 
number of investigations adequate? 
 
PACTE reports one case of sex tourism, 315 cases of "corruption of a 
minor", and one "incitement to debauchery" . 
 
5. How many children were rescued as a result? 
 
PACTE notes that most of the children in CSEC cases have already 
been abused before any complaint has been filed, and was unable to 
provide any data on how many children were "rescued". 
 
6. How many arrests were made or other kinds of prosecutions carried 
out? 
 
PACTE reports one arrest for sex tourism, 190 for "corruption of a 
minor", and one for "incitement to debauchery". 
 
7. How many cases were closed or resolved? 
 
No figures beyond those in para 6 are available. 
 
8. How many convictions? 
 
PACTE reports two convictions for sex tourism (the second may have 
been from a previous year, given the data in para 4), 57 for 
corruption of a minor, and one for incitement to debauchery. 
 
9. Did sentences imposed meet standards established in the legal 
framework? 
 
PACTE states that the sentences imposed are in accordance with those 
defined in the legal framework.  Lacking details on the cases and 
sentences, Post is unable to corroborate this statement. 
 
10. Were sentences imposed actually served? 
 
No data available. 
 
11. What is the average length of time it takes to resolve cases of 
CSEC? 
 
See 2D, Section I, para 11.  Same answer from PACTE. 
 
12. Did the government offer any training for investigators or 
others responsible for enforcement of CSEC? If so, what was the 
impact (if any) of these trainings? 
 
See 2D, Section I, para 12. 
 
 
13. If the country/territory experienced armed conflict during the 
reporting period or in the recent past involving the use of child 
soldiers, what actions were taken to penalize those responsible? 
Were these actions adequate or meaningful given the situation? 
 
Not applicable. 
 
2D, Section III: Use of Children in Illicit Activities 
 
1. Did the country/territory have agencies or personnel dedicated to 
enforcement of use of children in illicit activities? How many 
investigators/social workers/dedicated police officers did the 
government employ to conduct investigations? If there were no 
dedicated agencies or personnel, provide an estimate of the number 
of people who were responsible for such investigations.  Was the 
number of investigators adequate? 
 
See 2D, Section I, para 1. 
 
2. How much funding was provided to agencies responsible for 
investigating use of children in illicit activities? Was this amount 
adequate? Did investigators have sufficient office facilities, 
transportation, fuel, and other necessities to carry out 
investigations? 
 
See 2D, Section I, para 2. 
 
3. Did the country/territory maintain a hotline or other mechanism 
for reporting use of children in illicit activities violations?  If 
so, how many complaints were received in the reporting period? 
 
See Section 2C para 3 - "805" is the sole hotline, and accepts calls 
for all issues related to crimes involving minors. 
 
4. How many investigations were opened in regard to use of children 
in illicit activities? Was the number of investigations adequate? 
 
No information available. 
 
5. How many children were rescued as a result? 
 
No information available. 
 
6. How many arrests were made or other kinds of prosecutions carried 
out? 
 
No information available. 
 
7. How many cases were closed or resolved? 
 
No information available. 
 
8. How many convictions? 
 
No information available. 
 
9. Did sentences imposed meet standards established in the legal 
framework? 
 
No information available. 
 
10. Were sentences imposed actually served? 
 
No information available. 
 
11. What is the average length of time it takes to resolve cases of 
use of children in illicit activities? 
 
See 2D, Section I, para 11. 
 
12. Did the government offer any training for investigators or 
others responsible for enforcement of use of children in illicit 
activities? If so, what was the impact (if any) of these trainings? 
 
 
See 2D, Section I, para 12. 
 
13. If the country/territory experienced armed conflict during the 
reporting period or in the recent past involving the use of child 
soldiers, what actions were taken to penalize those responsible? 
Were these actions adequate or meaningful given the situation? 
 
Not applicable. 
 
2E) GOVERNMENT POLICIES ON CHILD LABOR: 
 
 
1. Did the government have a policy or plan that specifically 
addresses exploitive child labor? Please describe. 
 
The GOM drafted a National Action Plan for the Fight against Child 
Labor (Plan National d'Action de Lutte contre le Travail des 
Enfants, or PNALTE) in 2004 (see 2C para 1) that details plans 
through 2019.  The GOM recently conducted an interim assessment 
(covering the first third of the plan, from 2004 to 2009), although 
Post has been unable to obtain a copy of this report. 
 
ILO and USG programs on child labor in Madagascar have all been 
designed with this framework in mind.  The most recent legislative 
initiative under the PNALTE, a draft bill concerning the enforcement 
and implementation of regulations on WFCL (see 2B para 1), has been 
blocked due to the current political crisis. 
 
PACTE has created a website to disseminate information on the GOM's 
fight against child labor, which was reportedly developed in the 
last year, although Post cannot confirm that.  The site functions, 
but is already out of date, and can be accessed at www.lcte.gov.mg. 
 
2. Did the country/territory incorporate exploitive child labor 
specifically as an issue to be addressed in poverty reduction, 
development, educational or other social policies, such as Poverty 
Reduction Strategy Papers, etc? Please describe. 
 
Aside from the PNALTE, exploitive child labor has figured into 
several policies and strategies from the GOM since 2004, most 
notably as an element of the Madagascar Action Plan (MAP), a 
multi-year development strategy developed under former president 
Marc Ravalomanana.  The MAP is unlikely to survive the current 
political crisis, but its broad focus on a wide variety of 
interconnected development goals will probably reappear in some form 
once Madagascar has restored a functional government. 
 
The GOM's Education for All (EFA) program, developed in 2005, 
includes an element on reducing child labor, although the focus is 
on structural changes within the Malagasy education system.  In 
addition, 786 (out of 1,640) communes have developed an action plan 
to fight the mistreatment of children in their "Communal Development 
Plan", although they routinely cite a lack of resources to implement 
their plans. 
 
3. Did the government provide funding to the plans described above? 
Please describe the amount and whether it was sufficient to carry 
out the planned activities. 
 
These programs are all funded through the GOM's "Public Investment 
Program" (PIP).  Although statistics are unavailable, it is unlikely 
that these plans were well-funded in 2009.  The de facto GOM reduced 
investment spending across the board in 2009 in response to reduced 
revenue (see para 1, summary), and this no doubt impacted child 
labor initiatives.  Even prior to the crisis, funding was 
insufficient to carry out the proposed activities. 
 
4. Did the government provide non-monetary support to child labor 
plans?  Please describe. 
 
Post is unaware of any such support. 
 
5. Provide any additional information about the status and 
effectiveness of the government's policies or plans during the 
reporting period in regard to exploitive child labor. 
 
The draft legislation on WFCL in January 2009 would have represented 
a significant step forward in the GOM's efforts to combat child 
labor, but that project will not reappear until Madagascar has a 
functioning government, and restores parliament (which was suspended 
in March 2009). 
 
According to a local NGO, the MOL created two additional Manjary Soa 
Centers (in Toamasina and Toliara) in 2009, modeled after the one 
created in Antananarivo in 2001. 
 
The GOM has supported an ILO/IPEC iniative to test a new 
data-collection model called the Child Labor Monitoring System 
(Systeme de Suivi du travail des Enfants, or SSTE).  It was launched 
in the Boeny region, and is focused on improving the credibility of 
data collected on child labor. 
 
In addition, as a result of GOM lobbying and an education campaign 
among industries with the support of UNICEF, ILO and other 
organizations, the Ambatovy mining project (near Toamasina) now 
applies a zero tolerance policy for its employees regarding child 
prostitution and CSEC.  Post has no data to illustrate the size of 
 
this particular problem, but anecdotal evidence from both this and a 
Rio Tinto project near Ft. Dauphin indicate that mining operations 
in these areas may have contributed to an increase in demand for 
local sex workers, some of whom are allegedly underage. 
 
6. Did the government participate in any commissions or task forces 
regarding exploitive child labor?  Was the commission active and/or 
effective? 
 
Post has no information indicating GOM participation in such 
efforts. 
 
7. Did the government sign a bilateral, regional or international 
agreement to combat trafficking? 
 
No. 
 
2F) SOCIAL PROGRAMS TO ELIMINATE OR PREVENT CHILD LABOR: 
 
1. Did the government implement any programs specifically to address 
the worst forms of child labor? Please describe. 
 
There were no new programs in the reporting period specifically to 
address WFCL.  A draft bill was discussed before the coup (see 2B 
para 1), but will advanced no further until parliament has been 
restored. 
 
2. Did the country/territory incorporate child labor specifically as 
an issue to be addressed in poverty reduction, development, 
educational or other social programs, such as conditional cash 
transfer programs or eligibility for school meals, etc? Please 
describe. 
 
See 2E, para 2. 
 
3. Did the government provide funding to the programs described 
above? Please describe amount and whether it was sufficient to carry 
out the planned activities. 
 
See 2E, para 3. 
 
4. Did the government provide non-monetary support to child labor 
programs?  Please describe. 
 
Post is unaware of any such programs. 
 
5. Provide any additional information about the status and 
effectiveness of the government's activities during the reporting 
period in relation to the programs described above. If the programs 
involved government provision of social services to children at risk 
of or involved in exploitive child labor, please describe and assess 
the effectiveness of these services. 
 
No additional information. 
 
6. If the government signed one or more bilateral, regional or 
international agreement/s to combat trafficking, what steps did it 
take to implement such agreement/s? Did the agreement/s result in 
tangible improvements?  If so, please describe. 
 
Per 2E, para 7, no agreements were signed. 
 
2G) CONTINUAL PROGRESS: 
 
1. Considering the information provided to the questions above, 
please provide an assessment of whether, overall, the government 
made progress in regard to combating exploitive child labor during 
the reporting period.  In making this assessment, please indicate 
whether there has been an increase or decrease from previous years 
in inspections/investigations, prosecutions, and convictions; 
funding for child labor elimination policies and programs; and any 
other relevant indicators of government commitment. 
 
The ongoing political crisis, and the resulting fiscal crunch, has 
had a severe impact on the GOM's ability to address child labor, 
along with most other social problems.  However, due to the 
continued lack of reliable statistics and the sheer size of the 
problem (with 1.8 million children identified as "economically 
active" in the 2007 ENTE), the lack of government progress in 2009 
might better be viewed in a slightly broader context: since the GOM 
began addressing exploitive child labor in 2001, at no time has the 
government invested substantial resources or produced significant 
results (relative to the size of the problem) on this issue.  The 
failure to improve in 2009 will not ultimately upset the trend lines 
for either government interventions or results, which have remained 
decidedly flat despite a decade of attention. 
 
 
Where the government has succeeded is in allowing the ILO and 
international donors (including the USG) to innovate in this field. 
 
 
USDOL, though local partner PACT, has launched a multi-year 
initiative in seven regions to prevent or withdraw 9,000 children 
from child labor. 
 
The Government of France, through ILO/IPEC and RAF, has launched a 
program providing technical and financial support for capacity 
building in three regions, to provide vocational training to 
children withdrawn from child labor. 
 
The European Union, through ILO/IPEC's TACKLE program, has launched 
a program in four regions to support families that are reintegrating 
child-laborers in school.  It has components addressing the 
prevention, withdrawal, education, and mobilization elements of the 
fight against child labor. 
 
As mentioned in 2C para 13, much work remains to be done to develop 
the GOM's contribution to the fight against child labor.  Aside from 
financing the Manjary Soa Center (see para 2), and working to 
develop the PNALTE, the state doesn't directly finance any project 
in this domain.  The majority of the ministries involved in fighting 
child labor lack the budgetary discretion to launch their own 
initiatives.  Although the complex inter-ministerial structures 
designed to address child labor (see 2C para 1) bring all the 
stakeholders into the process, they also cause bureaucratic 
in-fighting, made worse by continual turn-over within each ministry 
that severely impedes their long-term ability to implement the 
PNALTE.