Can an ILO convention legally contain non-mandatory provisions?

There is no reason why mandatory provisions should not be complemented by non-mandatory ones. There are precedents in international labour Conventions where the non-mandatory “should” is used rather than the mandatory “shall”.


  1. What is meant by the special status of Part B of the code of new ILO (International Labour Organisation ) Convention and why was it needed?
  2. Since Part B is not mandatory, why is it part of the convention and not the subject of an international labour recommendation?