CWLRCP has addressed Law No. (6) of 2016 concerning Social Security, reiterating its firm position against the issuance of any decisions carrying the force of law amidst the current political and geographical division. Consequently, the Center demands the suspension of this law in light of the ongoing division. Furthermore, the Center believes that the law requires reformulation to address existing legal loopholes, with the aim of producing a sound draft for enactment once the legislative authority is functioning properly.

The Center views social security as a crucial means of social protection that the state should prioritize establishing. However, the provisions of this law indicate the absence of the state as a primary guarantor of contributors’ funds and its transformation into a burden on workers, thereby diminishing their rights, as will be outlined below:

I. General Observations:

• The law does not adequately consider its applicability to the Gaza Strip and appears to have been drafted solely for implementation in the West Bank, particularly regarding (setting a minimum wage – the impact of the division on the Ministry of Labor in terms of labor inspection oversight of establishments – the de facto authority in Gaza’s non-recognition of presidential decrees and the law, etc.).
• The law’s drafting contains ambiguities and requires greater legal precision, as several articles contain vagueness that necessitate interpretation or clarification, such as (Article (49) – detailed observation below).

II. Detailed Observations on the Law’s Provisions:

• Article (2): The absence of the state as a guarantor of contributors’ funds poses a risk to contributors’ rights. The initial draft included a provision stating, “The state is the ultimate guarantor of the social security system.”
• Article (3): The postponement of implementing insurance for (sickness and health insurance, unemployment, family allowances) until an unspecified time affects contributors’ rights. Paragraph (3) states: “The insurances stipulated in clauses (d, e, f, g) of paragraph (1) of this article shall be implemented gradually and in subsequent stages under regulations issued by the Council of Ministers.” The Center proposes amending paragraph (3) to read: “The insurances stipulated in clauses (d, e, f, g) of paragraph (1) of this article shall be implemented under regulations issued by the Council of Ministers.”
• Article (4): Covered Categories: There is a contradiction regarding the inclusion of domestic workers and those in similar positions (clause 5) with what is stated in Article (43), paragraph (1/b), which stipulates that the wage subject to insurance must not be less than the minimum wage.
  

  • Domestic workers and those in similar positions often receive less than the minimum wage or a daily wage. Therefore, their inclusion as a covered category is merely for show.
  • Women are primarily affected by the provision in Article (43/1/b) because they often work as domestic workers or as attendants in NGOs and commercial establishments.
  • Women are generally affected because their employment in the private sector, especially in the informal sector (women in the unregulated sector), is below the announced minimum wage, particularly in the Gaza Strip (according to studies on women and work and Central Bureau of Statistics survey results).

• Article (4): Covered Categories: There is an inconsistency in the law’s geographical scope. Will the Social Security Corporation extend its responsibilities outside of Palestine? Paragraph (7) does not clarify who is meant by workers abroad, including those working in Palestine in 1948, and how the Corporation will track their accumulated rights and deductions. Also, for workers in Arab countries: Who is responsible for them – the Palestine Liberation Organization through its embassies? Local laws only pertain to the borders of the Palestinian state (areas under the Palestinian Authority).
• Article (17): The fund’s financial resources do not include any contribution from the state budget. Including a percentage from the state budget is essential to cover any financial deficit, guaranteeing contributors’ funds.
• Article (19): The formation decision does not stipulate a specific percentage for women, which should not be less than 30% according to the decision of the PLO Central Council.
• Article (43): There is an issue with the provision in (43/1/b): Insurance contributions do not include workers who receive the minimum wage. This excludes approximately 33% of wage earners in the private sector from benefiting from this law, totaling (101,600) workers earning less than the minimum wage (1450 shekels per month), with 50,900 workers in the West Bank and 50,700 workers in Gaza.
  

  • Domestic workers and those in similar positions, as well as workers subject to the daily wage system, are adversely affected.
  • Women are particularly affected, especially those working in agricultural projects, in homes, and in the informal sector.

• Article (49): There is a problem with the drafting of the provision. The employer’s share of the monthly contribution is unclear based on the provision’s wording.
  

  • The monthly contribution rates are (7.5%) deducted from the insured worker’s wage and (8.5%) of the insured person’s wage paid by the employer. The (8.5%) contributed by employers represents the end-of-service gratuity, meaning employers will only contribute 2% of the pension value. Considering that employers and workers are equal in managing the Social Security Fund and investing its funds, this results in the social security burden falling on workers and their funds.

• Article (51): Conditions for Entitlement to a Retirement Pension at the Age of (60) – The law does not specify any form of payment of insurance to the worker in the event of resignation for the purpose of travel.
• Article (52): Regarding the calculation of the retirement pension, in conjunction with Article (43/1/b), the law fails to achieve the principle of adequacy and respect for human dignity and the inability of the retirement pension to enable individuals to enjoy basic rights, but rather transforms them into the poor. This is due to the extremely low pension calculation factor of 1.7, which will make retirees’ pensions less than the minimum wage based on prevailing wage rates.
• Article (54) and Article (68): The retirement pension does not guarantee the minimum poverty line. The article stipulates that the retirement pension should not be less than 51% of the minimum wage or the value of the individual poverty line, whichever is higher, which is 725 shekels according to the current minimum wage.
• Article (56): Returning Lump-Sum Compensation Amounts in Case of Returning to Work: This article does not consider that the worker may have spent the money received and will not be able to return it, especially given the prevailing unemployment and economic conditions.
• Article (66): Regarding Heirs Entitled to a Retirement Pension: Paragraph (1/g): The husband of the female contributor is excluded as a beneficiary if he is incapable of earning an income for health reasons at the time of her death, with the medical authority determining whether the health condition prevents him from working or not. This law does not differentiate between workers in terms of gender regarding duties and financial entitlements deducted from the salary. A portion of the female employee’s salary is deducted for retirement purposes. Therefore, her legal heirs have the right to benefit from her retirement pension without any restrictions. Paragraph (2): It is unclear what is meant by the eligibility requirement for heirs to receive a retirement pension.

CWLRCP hopes that the President will give due consideration to these observations, which, if addressed, would bridge the gap in the law as a viable draft for approval in circumstances of ending the division and achieving national reconciliation.

CWLRCP