Introduction

1. The Committee on Freedom of Association, set up by the Governing Body at its 117th Session (November 1951), met at the International Labour Office, Geneva, on 25 and 27 May 1987 under the chairmanship of Mr. Roberto Ago, former Chairman of the Governing Body.

2. The member of the Committee of Spanish nationality was not present during the examination of the case relating to Spain (Case No. 1375).

3. The Committee is currently seized of 58 cases (this figure includes the cases relating to Turkey (Cases Nos. 997, 999 and 1029) which are examined in the 252nd Report) in which the complaints have been submitted to the governments concerned for observations. At its present meeting it examined 28 cases in substance, reaching definitive conclusions in 20 cases and interim conclusions in 8 cases; the remaining cases were adjourned for the various reasons set out in the following paragraphs.

New cases

4. The Committee adjourned until its next meeting the cases relating to the Dominican Republic (Case No. 1393), Canada/Quebec (Case No. 1394), Costa Rica (Case No. 1395), Haiti (Case No. 1396), Argentina (Case No. 1397), Honduras (Case No. 1398), Spain (Case No. 1399), Ecuador (Case No. 1400), Czechoslovakia (Case No. 1402), Uruguay (Cases Nos. 1403 and 1404) and Burkina Faso (Case No. 1405) concerning which it is still awaiting information or observations from the governments concerned. All these cases relate to complaints submitted since the last meeting of the Committee.

Adjournments

5. The Committee awaits observations or information from the governments concerned in the cases relating to Nicaragua (Cases Nos. 1129, 1344 and 1351), Belgium (Case No. 1373), Peru (Case No. 1386) and Morocco (Case No. 1388). The Committee again adjourned these cases and requests the governments of these countries to transmit the information or observations requested.

6. As regards Case No. 1309 (Chile), the Committee has received the observations of the Government and intends to examine this case in substance at its next meeting.

7. As regards Cases Nos. 1391 (United Kingdom) and 1401 (United States), the governments concerned have indicated in communications that their observations on these cases will be transmitted in the near future.

8. As regards Case No. 1362 (Spain), the Government's reply has been received but the complainant organisation has transmitted additional information; the Committee consequently adjourns its examination of this case to await receipt of the Government's further observations.

9. As regards Case No. 1376 (Colombia), the Government sent certain observations in two communications dated 25 February and 29 April 1987 on some of the outstanding allegations. Since the Government states in these communications that it will be sending additional observations, the Committee adjourns its examination of this case until these are received.

10. As regards Case No. 1385 (New Zealand), a letter dated 27 April 1987 from the Minister of Labour contains information to the effect that the Labour Relations Bill based on the Government White Paper on Labour Relations has been introduced and is before a Select Committee of the Parliament which is considering submissions on it from the public. The Minister points out that, with the Bill open to considerable change during the process of public consultation, no comment from the Government is possible until the provisions are finalised. The legislation is expected to come into force in June or July 1987 when the Government will provide its observations. The Committee takes note of this information and trusts that it will be in a position to examine the case at its next session, in November 1987.

11. As regards Case No. 1392 (Venezuela) relating to a complaint presented on 22 September 1986 by the Trade Union Organisation of Pilots of Viasa ("OSPV") and concerning the dismissal of its executive council, the Government, in communications of 24 April and 6 May 1987, indicates that the question of the dismissal of several trade union leaders is still pending before the courts. It adds that the Viasa company has appealed to a higher judicial authority and that it will send additional information later. The Committee takes note of this information and in the circumstances adjourns its examination of the case.

Conference contacts

12. Following its examination of the case relating to Nepal (Case No. 1337), the Committee authorised its Chairman to contact the representative of the Government of Nepal attending the International Labour Conference in order to discuss appropriate ways or procedures through which the Committee may pursue its examination of the questions relating to this case.

URGENT APPEALS

13. The Committee notes that in spite of the time which has elapsed since the presentation or last examination of Case No. 1190 (Peru), Cases Nos. 1298 and 1372 (Nicaragua), Case No. 1340 (Morocco) and Case No. 1383 (Pakistan), the observations and information requested of the governments have not yet been received. The Committee draws these governments' attention to the fact that, in conformity with the procedural rules set out in paragraph 17 of the Committee's 127th Report approved by the Governing Body, it will present a report at its next meeting on the substance of these cases even if the governments' observations or information have not been received in time. The Committee accordingly requests these governments to transmit their observations as a matter of urgency.

14. The Committee draws the legislative aspects of the following cases to the attention of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations: Cases Nos. 997, 999 and 1029 (Turkey), 1219 (Liberia), 1250 (Belgium) and 1275/1368 (Paraguay).

Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and of the Governing Body

15. As regards Cases Nos. 988 and 1003 (Sri Lanka), which the Committee considered most recently in its 248th Report, paragraph 22 (March 1987), the Government had been requested to keep the Committee informed of the reinstatement of workers who remained unemployed since the July 1980 strike and to reply to certain allegations made at a later stage by the International Union of Workers in Public and Allied Services concerning continued reprisals against civil servants who had participated in the strike. In a communication of 30 April 1987, the Government stresses, as it had in the previous examinations of these cases, that the events of July 1980 constituted "a vacation of posts in defiance of national law" which left the Government no alternative but to fill the vacancies so created. It reiterates that, out of purely humane considerations, the Government has, when vacancies become available, reinstated or re-employed those persons who have given satisfactory reasons for their earlier vacation of post. According to the Government, 3,047 persons still remain unemployed due to the unavailability of vacancies, but the Government has accepted the proposals of a committee, appointed by the President, to examine these remaining cases of unemployment, to entitle these persons to their pensions or a gratuity as applicable, within a given framework. Thus, indicates the Government, the allegation of continued reprisals is unfounded; on the contrary, it has been taking all possible steps to resolve the problems confronting the persons involved. The Government adds that the proceedings against five trade unionists have again been referred to the High Court of Colombo, where indictments have now been filed against 12 persons (including the five trade unionists) and inquiries are continuing. The Committee takes note of this information and requests the Government to inform it of the final decision in the High Court proceedings (which it observes with concern have been pending in various jurisdictions since the trade unionists concerned were arrested in 1980) which it hopes will be concluded rapidly.

16. In paragraph 22 of its 248th Report (approved by the Governing Body at its 235th Session, March 1987), the Committee expressed regret at the absence of a reply or information from the Government concerning the recommendations in Case No. 1189 (Kenya) at paragraph 395 of its 241st Report (approved by the Governing Body at its 231st Session November 1985) relating to the de-registration of the Kenya Civil Servants' Association. A communication dated 6 March 1987 was subsequently received from the complainant in the case, the Public Services International, and conveyed to the Government, suggesting that serious consideration should be given to the possibility of a direct contacts mission. A cable from the Government dated 15 May states that no new information has become available since the last report and that efforts to find a solution are continuing. It adds that a full report on the latest position will be sent by August 1987. The Committee takes note of this information and trusts that the information that the Government has stated it will be providing in August 1987 will respond in full to the recommendations made previously in regard to the case, as well as to the suggestion contained in the communication from the PSI which was referred to it in March 1987.

17. In Case No. 1191 (Chile), the Committee had requested the Government to keep it informed of developments concerning the appeals pending before the Supreme Court relating to the alleged ill-treatment of several trade unionists who had participated in a public protest in March 1983. In a communication dated 18 May 1987 the Government states that the Court decided, in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure to adjourn the proceedings until more adequate information was available. The Committee takes note of this information and expresses the hope that adequate information may be made available so as to permit the resumption of the trial and the punishment of the guilty parties.

18. As regards Case No. 1237 (Brazil), the Committee last considered it in paragraph 22 of its 243rd Report (March 1986) and hoped to receive from the Government a copy of the judgement handed down by the Judge of Colmarca in the Alago Grande Region (State of Paraíba) concerning the death of the trade union leader, Margarida Maria Alves, in August 1983. In a communication dated 19 May 1987, the Government sent a copy of the judgement, sentencing the accused to terms of imprisonment; those sentenced could appeal in accordance with the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Committee takes note of this information and again invites the Government to adopt severe measures against such acts of violence and so as to protect the free exercise of trade union rights.

19. As regards Case No. 1258 (El Salvador), which the Committee examined in its 243rd Report (see in particular paras. 393 to 399 and 418), the Government was requested to keep the Committee informed on developments in the trial concerning the death, in November 1985, of the trade union leader Juan Pablo Mejía Rodríguez. In a communication dated 6 January 1987 the Government states that although the trial is still at the investigating stage, the authorities have been able to determine already who is the author of the crime but it will be necessary to await the conclusion of the inquiries. The Committee takes note of this information and requests the Government to continue to keep it informed of developments in this matter.

20. As regards Case No. 1261 (United Kingdom), the Committee takes note of a communication of 6 May 1987 in which the Government states that it will be submitting a reply when the conclusions of all relevant proceedings before the European Commission on Human Rights are available.

21. As regards Case No. 1335 (Malta), the Committee takes note with interest of information contained in a letter dated 24 March 1987 from the Government stating that, while it maintains that there was no infringement of trade union rights, it has decided to make an ex gratia payment to the student workers as compensation for the salary withheld following their protest strike. The Government adds that the payment was awarded under the amnesty granted by the Government to mark important changes in the Constitution of Malta which were recently approved.

22. As regards Case No. 1379 (Fiji) the information concerning legislation and an agreement relating to collective bargaining which were the subject of the recommendation of the Committee in paragraph 362(e) of its 248th Report (approved by the Governing Body at its 235th Session, March 1987) had been forwarded by the Government but were not yet available at the time of the last meeting of the Committee. The Committee takes note of this information and considers that this aspect of the case does not require further examination.

23. As regards Case No. 1381 (Ecuador), the Committee had requested the Government to keep it informed of the appeal presented by the complainants before the Court of Constitutional Guarantees against Decree No. 2205 on solidarity strikes. The Committee had also requested the Government to repeal Decree No. 105 which severely punished the organisers of and participants in general collective work stoppages. In a communication dated 6 May 1987, the Government transmits a copy of the sentence handed down by the Constitutional Court on 10 December 1986 which suspends, on the grounds of their unconstitutionality, sections 1, 2, 5 and 7 of Decree No. 2205. The Government explains, however, that this suspension is awaiting confirmation or rejection by the National Congress. It also states that the constitutionality and currency of Decree No. 105 has been confirmed. The Committee takes note of this information and again urges the Government to consider the measures which might be taken to repeal Decree No. 105, which the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations had been requesting for many years in view of its incompatibility with the provisions of Convention No. 87, ratified by Ecuador.

24. Finally, as regards Cases Nos. 1054 and 1282 (Morocco), 1074 (United States), 1157, 1192 and 1353 (Philippines), 1266 (Burkina Faso), 1279 (Portugal), 1332 (Pakistan) and 1350 (Canada/British Columbia), the Committee again requests these governments to keep it informed of developments in these various matters. The Committee hopes that these governments will communicate the information requested at an early date.

25. As regards Cases Nos. 1100 (India), 1216, 1268 and 1307 (Honduras), 1230 and 1348 (Ecuador), 1270, 1294, 1313 and 1331 (Brazil), 1296 (Antigua and Barbuda) and 1360 (Dominican Republic), the Committee regrets that despite repeated appeals the governments concerned have not replied to its requests to be kept informed of developments in these various matters. The Committee would recall that:

In Case No. 1100 (India), the Committee, at its meeting of May 1983, had requested the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of the Supreme Court case brought by public service employees against amendments to the General Insurance Business (Nationalisation) Act, which altered the conditions of service of employees in the insurance sector (see 226th Report, paras. 82-90). In its communication of 9 May 1986 the Government stated that the Case was still sub judice. The Committee notes that, despite the time that has elapsed since certain public service employees appealed to the Supreme Court, it has not yet received the text of the judgement pronounced in this matter. Consequently, the Committee wishes once again to draw the Government's attention to the fact that legislation which affects the provisions laid down in collective agreements may violate the right of workers to bargain collectively through their trade unions.

As regards Cases Nos. 1216, 1268 and 1307 (Honduras), the Committee last examined them jointly at its meeting in February 1986 and requested the Government to keep it informed of the final outcome of the trials of the alleged perpetrators of the murder of four leaders of the Workers' Union of the Agricultural and Cattle-Raising Company of Sula (SITRACOAGS) (Case No. 1216), and of developments in the investigations under way to ascertain the whereabouts of Messrs. Rolando Vindel and Gustavo Morales who had disappeared (Cases Nos. 1268 and 1307). The Committee notes with concern that, despite the long period that has elapsed since the events (March 1983 in Case No. 1216 and March 1984 in Cases Nos. 1268 and 1307), the direct contacts mission carried out by the representative of the Director-General of the ILO in January 1986, and repeated requests for information, the Government has not sent specific observations on these matters. In these circumstances, the Committee expresses once again the hope that the above-mentioned trials will have enabled the guilty parties to be punished. At the same time, it trusts that, as a result of the investigations carried out, the whereabouts of the missing trade union leaders will have been established.

As regards Cases Nos. 1230 and 1348 (Ecuador), the Committee examined the matters dealt with in Case No. 1230 at its meeting in February 1984 and requested the Government to inform it of the outcome of the legal proceedings undertaken in connection with the circumstances surrounding the death in June 1983 of two trade union leaders of the Cullutuc Indian Community (Province of Chimborazo), namely Mr. Pedro Cuji and Mrs. Felipa Pucha, and the injury of three peasants in the dispute that had arisen between the members of the said Community and the owner of the Cullutuc estate (see 233rd Report, paras. 187-201). The Government, in a communication dated 1 June 1984, had stated that the case was being tried before the Second Criminal Court of Chimborazo and that the final decision in the proceedings would be communicated as soon as it was available. As for Case No. 1348, the Committee examined it at its meeting in February 1986 and requested the Government to inform it of the outcome of the appeal pending before the Administrative Court against the refusal to register the National Union of Workers and Employees in the Ecuadorian Institute of Telecommunications (IETEL) (see 243rd Report, paras. 280-292). In respect of Case No. 1230 the Committee regrets that, despite the time that has elapsed, the Government has not communicated the judgement handed down by the courts. It expresses the hope that the legal proceedings will have made it possible to determine responsibilities and punish the guilty parties. As far as Case No. 1348 is concerned, the Committee observes that the Government has not communicated any information on the outcome of the appeal before the Administrative Court and wishes to draw the Government's attention to the comments made by the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations concerning provisions of the Telecommunications Act and the Act on the Civil Service and Administrative Careers, which prohibit public servants from setting up trade unions and, as it has already done when examining this case, the Committee reiterates its opinion that the staff of the IETEL should enjoy the right to form trade unions which can bargain collectively. It trusts that, when reaching a decision in this matter, the Administrative Court will take account of Convention No. 98, which Ecuador has ratified.

As regards Cases Nos. 1270, 1294, 1313 and 1331 (Brazil), the Committee had requested the Government, when it examined Case No. 1270 at its meeting in May 1986, to keep it informed of the outcome of the appeals pending before the courts and of developments in the labour dispute that had been going on in the Belgo Mineira iron and steel undertaking in the State of Minas Gerais since 1983 (see 244th Report, paras. 210-228). The Committee also examined Cases Nos. 1294, 1313 and 1331 jointly at its meeting in May 1986 (see 244th Report, paras. 229-243) and requested the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of the investigations carried out by the tripartite committee appointed by the Government itself to investigate the very serious acts of violence committed by the employers against trade union leaders and activists in the sugar-cane plantations and alcohol distilleries in several States of Brazil, and particularly in Pernambuco and Sao Paulo. The Committee regrets to note that, despite the time that has elapsed, the Government has not replied to its requests to be kept informed of developments in these cases. It wishes to draw the Government's attention to the importance it attaches to protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and to respect for human rights as prerequisites to respect of trade union rights.

In Case No. 1296 (Antigua and Barbuda), at its meeting in February 1986, the Committee had requested the Government to send a copy of the Industrial Court's award concerning the dismissal of hotel workers following their participation in a strike in December 1983 (see 243rd Report, paras. 262-279). The Committee regrets that, despite repeated requests for information and the time which has elapsed since the occurrence of the events that form the subject of this complaint, the Government has not communicated the text of the decision handed down in this matter. In this respect, the Committee wishes to draw the Government's attention to the fact that it considers strikes to be one of the means of action available to workers' organisations to further and defend the economic and social interests of their members and that any act of discrimination against workers for having participated in a lawful strike is contrary to Convention No. 98, ratified by Antigua and Barbuda.

In Case No. 1360 (Dominican Republic), at its meeting of May 1986, the Committee had requested the Government to communicate the outcome of the trial of the policeman responsible for the death of the trade unionist, Mario Rosa Polanco, during his detention following violent police intervention in a general assembly of the Trade Union of Workers of the "Catarey" Sugar Plantation in January 1986. The Committee deplores the fact that, despite the seriousness of the allegations and its repeated requests for information, the Government has not replied, and once more draws the Government's attention to the principle that the authorities should refrain from any interference which could restrict or impede the exercise of the right to hold trade union meetings.

26. The Committee expresses the firm hope that, in all these cases, the governments concerned will take the necessary measures to give full effect to the recommendations of the Committee and of the Governing Body.