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 16, 17, 18 and 23 February 1989 under the chairmanship of Mr. Roberto Ago, former Chairman of the Governing Body.

2. The members of the Committee of Zambian and Indian nationality were not present during the examination of the cases relating to Zambia (Case No. 1406) and India (Case No. 1428), respectively.

3. The Committee is currently seized of 68 cases in which the complaints have been submitted to the governments concerned for observations. At its present meeting it examined 17 cases in substance, reaching definitive conclusions in 9 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 Peru (Cases Nos. 1478 and 1484), India (Case No. 1479), Malaysia (Case No. 1480), Brazil (Cases Nos. 1481 and 1487), Costa Rica (Case No. 1483), Venezuela (Case No. 1485), Portugal (Case No. 1486) and Guatemala (Case No. 1488) concerning which it is awaiting information or observations from the Governments concerned. All these cases relate to complaints submitted since the last meeting of the Committee.

Subsequent adjournments

5. The Committee is still awaiting observations or information from the Governments or complainants concerned in the cases relating to El Salvador (Cases Nos. 1273 and 1441), Nepal (Case No. 1337), Paraguay (Cases Nos. 1341, 1435, 1440 and 1446), Czechoslovakia (Case No. 1402), Bahrain (Case No. 1413), Philippines (Case No. 1426), Indonesia (Case No. 1431), Peru (Case No. 1432), Colombia (Cases Nos. 1434 and 1477), Saint Lucia (Case No. 1447), Canada (Case No. 1451), Burkina Faso (Case No. 1462), Liberia (Case No. 1463), India (Cases Nos. 1468 and 1471), Morocco (Case No. 1473), Spain (Case No. 1474) and Panama (Case No. 1475). The Committee again adjourned these cases and again requests the Governments of these countries or the complainants to transmit the information or observations requested.

6. As regards Cases Nos. 1455 and 1456 (Argentina), 1460 (Uruguay) and 1461 (Brazil), the Governments concerned have announced that they will send their observations shortly. Concerning Case No. 1421 (Denmark), the Government sent its observations in communications dated 10 December 1987 and 22 November 1988. The complainant provided certain additional information in a communication of 13 February 1989. This information has been transmitted to the Government for comments. In Case No. 1425 (Fiji), the Government has sent certain observations, but additional information has been requested. As regards Case No. 1466 (Spain), the Government sent its observations but the Committee considered it necessary to ask the Office to obtain additional information from the Government in order to be able to make a fully informed decision. The Committee adjourns these cases while awaiting receipt of the observations and information.

7. As regards Case No. 1309 (Chile), 1385 (New Zealand), Cases Nos. 1412 and 1453 (Venezuela), 1464 (Honduras) and Case No. 1472 (Spain), the Committee has received the Governments' observations and intends to examine these cases in substance at its next meeting.

8. As regards Case No. 1438 (Canada), the Government sent its observations in a communication dated 29 November 1988. Subsequently, in a communication of 31 January 1989, the Canadian Labour Congress announced that it would shortly be sending additional information. In accordance with the wish expressed by the complainant, the Committee adjourns its examination of this case.

9. As regards Case No. 1439 (United Kingdom), the Committee decided to adjourn its examination of this case until its next meeting pending examination of the relevant legislation by the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations at its March 1989 Session. The Committee also noted further communications from the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) dated 10 and 13 February 1989. The first of these requested that they be given the opportunity to make oral submissions in relation to this case. The second indicated that the Government had declined to make a copy of its reply available to the Union - apparently because it considered that reply to be confidential to the ILO and to the Committee. Accordingly, the NUM asked that the Committee send them a copy of the reply. The Committee decided that it would not be appropriate to hear oral submissions in this case. It did, however, feel that the NUM and the other complainants should have access to a copy of the Government's reply.

10. As regards Case No. 1469 (Netherlands), the Committee decided to adjourn its examination of this case until its next meeting, pending examination of the relevant legislation by the Committee of Experts at its March 1989 session.

11. As regards Case No. 1482 (Paraguay) relating to complaints presented by the Trade Union of Commercial Employees and Wage Earners (SEOC) on 7 November 1988 and by the Inter-Union Movement of Workers on 12 January 1989, the Government, in a communication dated 17 January 1989, sent certain information and stated that it would shortly send a detailed reply on this case. The Committee takes note of the contents of the Government's communication and adjourns this case while awaiting receipt of the additional observations.

URGENT APPEALS

12. As regards Cases Nos. 1168 (El Salvador) and 1476 (Panama), the Committee observes that, despite the time which had elapsed since the presentation of these complaints, the Governments have not transmitted the observations or information which had been requested from them. The Committee draws the attention of these Governments to the fact that, in accordance 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 observations requested from the Government have not been received in due time. The Committee accordingly requests the Governments to transmit their observations as a matter of urgency.

13. 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. 1396 (Haiti), 1444 (Philippines), 1448 (Norway), 1458 (Iceland) and 1470 (Denmark).

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

14. As regards Case No. 1054 (Morocco), most recently examined by the Committee at its February 1986 meeting, it had requested the Government to keep it informed of any measures taken with a view to reinstating in their jobs all those workers who had been dismissed after the general strike in June 1981. The Government had supplied some information to the effect that by virtue of a royal decision dated 18 February 1988 it had been decided to readmit all suspended or dismissed workers and to establish the necessary contacts in order that the situation of suspended public servants could be normalised. Subsequently, on 15 November 1988, the Democratic Confederation of Labour indicated that, apart from workers in the education and public health sectors, all the other dismissed workers in the agricultural sector, urban transport, local collectivities and companies for the distribution of water and electricity had still not been re-employed in their posts. These allegations were transmitted to the Government and the Committee requests it to supply its observations thereon.

15. In Cases Nos. 1157, 1192 and 1353 (Philippines) the Committee had requested the Government to keep it informed on developments regarding the restoration of trade union property held by the court for use in the trial against two leaders of the trade unions TUPAS and KMU, of investigations into the disappearance of certain trade unionists, as well as on the outcome of the inquiry into the Escalante massacre. In a communication dated 11 November 1988, the Government states that the trial concerning the Escalante case is now at its second stage, the prosecution having concluded the presentation of its accusations before the First Division Special Court (Sandiganbayan); the defence can start presenting its witnesses and evidence at the next hearing scheduled for the end of 1988. The Government adds that all the accused in the case are still in the custody of the military authorities. As regards the trial of two trade union leaders (Cases Nos. 1157 and 1192), the Government repeats the information supplied earlier that the criminal proceedings against Messrs. Crispin Beltran and Bonifacio Tupaz were dismissed and their co-accused acquitted of the charges (noted by the Committee in November 1986, 246th Report, para. 16) and that no request had been made to the court for return of the office equipment to its rightful owners. The Committee takes note of this information and considers that no purpose would be served in continuing to request follow-up information on Cases Nos. 1157 and 1192. It requests the Government to keep it informed of developments in the Escalante trial.

16. As regards Case No. 1189 (Kenya), examined by the Committee for the last time at its November 1985 meeting, the Government has been requested to keep the Committee informed of any measure taken to permit the establishment of trade union organisations through which the civil servants in question could carry out normal trade union activities, since the Kenya Civil Servants' Welfare Association had not been allowed to pursue such activities and its assets had been confiscated. Subsequently, in a communication of 15 May 1987, the Government announced that it would be sending for the month of August 1987 a full report on this matter. In a further communication dated 3 February 1989, the Government requests the Committee to allow it more time to finalise the ongoing consultations regarding the kind of measures that it needs to take to permit the establishment of organisations through which Kenyan civil servants will be able to pursue normal trade union activities. According to the Government, the Ministry of Labour has already prepared these new proposals and it will inform the ILO once the final government approval has been obtained. The Committee takes note of this information but must note with concern that, despite the length of time that has elapsed since the last examination of this case, the Government still has not sent details on this matter as it had announced in its communication of May 1987. It therefore urges the Government to send a detailed report on the measures that it is going to adopt to re-establish the right to form trade unions of public servants and on the situation as regards the assets which were confiscated from the above-mentioned organisation.

17. As regards Cases Nos. 1195, 1215 and 1262 (Guatemala), the Government, in a communication dated 31 October 1988, states that during a seminar on labour problems and social security held in November 1987, a document was drawn up outlining the aims and activities to be undertaken by the Ministry of Labour and Social Security to promote a climate of confidence favourable to the setting up of trade union organisations, simplifying the bureaucratic procedures and eliminating formal requirements contrary to international standards and Convention No. 87. The Government supplies statistical tables from the Ministry of Labour and Social Security showing the percentages of registered trade unions. The Committee takes note of this information.

18. As regards Case No. 1250 (Belgium) concerning allegations presented by the Independent Union of Railway Workers (SIC) according to which the National Company of Belgian Railways (SNCB) had rejected its claim to status as a staff organisation and denied it the right to intervene on behalf of its affiliates, the Government, in a communication dated 16 January 1989 transmitted the SNCB's observations which reiterate the criteria applied in the determination of the "most representative" occupational organisation of workers. According to the SNCB, the SIC has not supplied any information to change its opinion in this respect and the SNCB limits itself to stating again that each staff member in service can assist an employee during the examination of a complaint or individual representation that has been presented. The Committee sees no reason to change the conclusions and recommendations that it adopted previously in this case.

19. As regards Case No. 1343 (Colombia), the Committee had requested the Government to keep it informed of developments in the various cases of deaths or disappearances of trade unionists. In a communication dated 20 December 1988, the Government states that some of the presumed perpetrators of the murder of Dionisio Hernán Calderón, died violently during other bloody incidents. As regards the death of Miguel Angel Puerta, the Sixth Superior Court of Medellín has indicated that as all avenues of investigation have been exhausted the case has been definitely closed. The Committee takes note of this information.

20. As regards Case No. 1388 (Morocco), the Committee had requested the Government to do its utmost towards the reinstatement of the trade union leaders who had been dismissed for having taken strike action in the mine run by the Sherifiana Phosphates Company (OCP) at Youssonfia. In a communication of 25 January 1989, the Moroccan Labour Union states that, on 28 May 1987, the Court of First Instance at Safi ordered the reinstatement of the dismissed workers or payment of compensation to them. The complainant indicates that, to date, the OCP has refused to obey the court order and it calls for the observance of it, for the evacuation of union premises and their return to the union, and for the free exercise of trade union rights in this undertaking. These allegations were transmitted to the Government for its comments. The Committee again requests the Government to inform it of developments in this matter.

21. As regards Case No. 1415 (Australia), the Committee had requested the Government to keep it informed of the complainant's attempt to vary its eligibility rule and of any changes to the facilities accorded to the complainant as a practical consequence of the various procedures that it has initiated in order to gain coverage of administrative service officers in various sectors. In two communications dated 8 and 14 February 1989, the Government states that on 18 November 1988, a commissioner of the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission dismissed the complainant association's application; on 9 December the association appealed to the full bench of the Commission against this dismissal, but subsequently withdrew its appeal. It appears from the copy of the commissioner's decision, which is supplied by the Government, that the complainant has had discussions with another union concerning a possible amalgamation and in the meantime appears to benefit from payroll deduction facilities and right of entry as concerns its current membership. The Government adds that the association is also able to distribute literature and use notice boards. The Committee takes note of this information with interest.

22. As regards Case No. 1427 (Brazil), which the Committee examined at its February 1988 meeting (254th Report, paras. 228-237), the Committee requested the Government to take steps so that the continuing dialogue between the National Association of Higher Education Teachers (ANDES) and the University of Santa Ursula would lead to the reinstatement of the workers in school administrations who had been dismissed. In a communication dated 11 November 1988, the Government again states that the dismissals were due to the financial difficulties of the institution. As for the teacher, Mr. Sydney Solis, who was, according to the complainant, a trade union leader, the Government states that it was able to ascertain that this person was not a member of the local executive of the teachers' union and that ANDES - in which at that time he held the position of vice-president - was a society set up under the civil law. The Committee takes note of this information and repeats the conclusions and recommendations it arrived at in this case.

23. Finally, as regards Cases Nos. 988 and 1003 (Sri Lanka), 1258 (El Salvador), 1279 (Portugal), 1282 (Morocco), 1346 (India), 1369 (Honduras), 1380 (Malaysia) and 1408 (Venezuela), 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.