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 1, 2, 4 and 7 November 1985 under the chairmanship of Mr. Roberto Ago, former Chairman of the Governing Body.

2. The members of the Committee of Australian and New Zealand nationality were not present during the examination of the cases relating to Australia/NT (Case No. 1324) and New Zealand (Case No. 1334), respectively.

3. The Committee is currently seized of 101 cases (this figure includes the cases relating to Turkey (Cases Nos. 997, 999 and 1029) which are examined in the 242nd Report) in which the complaints have been submitted to the governments concerned for observations. At its present meeting it examined 55 cases in substance, reaching definitive conclusions in 32 cases and interim conclusions in 23 cases; the remaining cases were adjourned for various reasons set out in the following paragraphs.

4. New cases: The Committee adjourned until its next meeting the cases relating to the Dominican Republic (Case No. 1339), Morocco (Case No. 1340), Spain (Case No. 1342), Nicaragua (Case No. 1344), Australia (Case No. 1345), India (Case No. 1346), Ecuador (Case No. 1348), Malta (Case No. 1349), Canada/British Columbia (Case No. 1350), Nicaragua (Case No. 1351) and Israel (Case No. 1352), concerning which it is still awaiting information or observations from the governments concerned. All these cases concern complaints brought since the last meeting of the Committee.

5. Adjournments: The Committee awaits observations and information concerning the cases relating to Argentina (Case No. 1220), Peru (Case No. 1321), Canada/British Columbia (Case No. 1329), Brazil (Case No. 1331), Pakistan (Case No. 1332) and Nepal (Case No. 1337). The Committee again adjourned these cases and requests the governments concerned to transmit their observations.

6. As regards the cases relating to USA (Case No. 1130), Costa Rica (Case No. 1304), Spain (Case No. 1320), the Dominican Republic (Case No. 1322), Tunisia (Case No. 1327), Malta (Case No. 1335), Denmark (Case No. 1338), Colombia (Case No. 1343) and Bolivia (Case No. 1347), the Committee has received the governments' observations only recently or in circumstances which did not allow it to examine them in substance. It intends to examine these cases in substance at its next meeting.

7. As regards the case concerning New Zealand (Case No. 1334), involving a complaint submitted by the New Zealand Employers' Federation, the Committee took note of a communication containing comments on the case by the New Zealand Federation of Labour. The Committee considered that, in accordance with its usual procedure, it could only take account, in its examination of the case, of communications transmitted by the complainant organisation and of those submitted by, or through, the government concerned. It accordingly decided to inform the New Zealand Federation of Labour that its comments can only be taken into account if they are transmitted by, or through, the Government. Since the Government's reply to the complaint has already been received, the Committee decided to examine this case at its next meeting.

URGENT APPEALS

8. The Committee observes that, in spite of the time which has elapsed since the last examination of the following cases and the seriousness of the allegations in some of them, the observations or information requested of the governments concerned have not been received: Cases Nos. 1190 and 1199 (Peru), 1296 (Antigua and Barbuda), 1300 (Costa Rica), 1308 (Grenada), 1311 (Guatemala), 1313 (Brazil) and 1325 (Sudan). The Committee draws the attention of the governments concerned 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 may present a report at its next meeting on the substance of these cases even if the governments' observations have not been received in time for that meeting. The Committee accordingly requests the governments concerned to transmit their observations or information as a matter of urgency.

9. 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); 1040 (Central African Republic); 1098, 1132, 1254, 1257, 1290, 1299 and 1316 (Uruguay); 1266 (Burkina Faso); 1291 (Colombia); 1293 (Dominican Republic); 1323 (Philippines); 1330 (Guyana).

Direct contacts

10. As regards the cases relating to El Salvador (Cases Nos. 953, 973, 1150, 1168, 1233, 1258, 1269, 1273 and 1281), the Committee at its May 1985 meeting noted that, following an official visit by the Director-General to the country, the Government was willing to accept a direct contacts mission with a view to examining the various aspects of these cases. Not having received confirmation from the Government to enable this mission to take place, the Committee urges the Government to reply as rapidly as possible so that the Committee will have before it, at its February 1986 meeting, information obtained on the spot on these cases.

11. As regards the cases relating to Honduras (Cases Nos. 1216 and 1271), a Government representative during the 71st Session of the Interntional Labour Conference (June 1985) agreed that a direct contacts mission take place with a view to overcoming the divergences existing between Conventions Nos. 87 and 98 and Honduran legislation, as well as to obtain information on, and to discuss, the above cases. Since the Committee has not received confirmation from the Government to enable this mission to take place, it urges the Government of Honduras to reply as rapidly as possible so that the Committee will have before it, at its February 1986 meeting, information obtained on the spot concerning these cases.

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

12. As regards Case No. 1074 (USA), examined by the Committee at its November 1981 meeting, information was requested from the Government on the results of the pending appeals lodged by dismissed air traffic controllers. In a communication dated 23 August 1985, the Government states that, as at 1 August 1985, the Full Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) has sustained the dismissal in 4,659 cases and ordered reinstatement in 94 cases; in 70 cases the appeal was withdrawn and the remaining 239 appeals before that instance are pending. At the US Court of Appeals level, despite a decision in favour of the employer in ten lead cases, 2,690 controllers renewed their appeals, 289 of which were subsequently withdrawn voluntarily by the appellants and 27 of which were dismissed by the Court. In 104 of these appeals, the Court has reaffirmed the dismissal. Thus, 2,270 of those cases are still pending. As this is the sixth communication from the Government concerning the status of the appeals, the Committee observes that it would now appear from all the information submitted that, of the 11,065 dismissed controllers who initially lodged appeals, a total of 444 reinstatements have been ordered. The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government and requests it to continue to inform it of the outcome of the pending appeals.

13. As regards Case No. 1100 (India), the Committee had requested the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of the case pending before the Supreme Court concerning the amendments introduced to the General Insurance Business (Nationalisation) Act which allegedly modify the conditions of service of the employees in the insurance sector without the consent of the unions concerned. In a communication of 9 July 1985, the Government states that the Supreme Court quashed the scheme of 1980 and left the option of amendment of the Act to the Government. The President of India promulgated, on 17 September 1984, an ordinance amending the General Insurance Business (Nationalisation) Act, 1972. This ordinance was challenged in the Supreme Court by the employees of the General Insurance Corporation. In the meantime, the General Insurance Business (Nationalisation) Amendment Bill was introduced and passed by both Houses of Parliament. This Act has also been challenged in the Supreme Court. The matter is, therefore, sub judice. The Committee takes note of this information and that the Government will communicate further developments regarding this case.

14. As regards the case concerning Chile (Case No. 1191), the Government states in a communication dated 14 August 1985 that the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court granted the appeal lodged in this case and overturned the decision to stay proceedings which had been handed down by the Military Court and the courts martial in complaints relating to allegations of torture and ill-treatment of trade union leaders. The Committee takes note of this information and requests the Government to keep it informed of developments in this matter.

15. As regards the case concerning Peru (Case No. 1228), the Committee had requested the Government to carry out an investigation into the alleged confiscation of mail addressed abroad by the Union of Peruvian Educational Workers and to inform it of the outcome of this inquiry. In a communication dated 15 July 1985, the Government states that, since 1980 when the democratic regime was instituted, all forms of control of mail have been eliminated; thus there is not, nor could there be, any supposed confiscation of mail in any circumstances. The Committee takes note of this reply.

16. As regards Case No. 1241 (Australia), examined by the Committee at its May 1984 meeting, information was requested from the Government on any measures taken to grant facilities to the Northern Territory Public Service Association, such as access to its members and distribution of trade union literature at the workplace. In a communication dated 20 August 1985, the Government states that, on 8 October 1984, the Northern Territory Public Service Commissioner circulated an instruction to all Departmental Heads and Prescribed Authorities indicating that the union in question be granted the same rights of access to its members and the use of notice boards as is accorded other registered unions. The Committee takes note of this information with interest.

17. As regards the case concerning Chile (Case No. 1297) which the Committee examined at its May 1985 meeting, it regretted that the Government had not supplied more detailed information on the persons who, according to the complainants, had been exiled for their trade union functions or activities and informed both the Government and the complainants that it would appreciate receiving any additional information available in this respect. In a communication dated 12 August 1985, the Government states that for humanitarian reasons it has authorised the return to the country of Héctor Cuevas Salvador. The Committee takes note of this information with interest and urges the Government to continue to keep it informed of any similar measure taken in favour of those persons still in exile.

18. Lastly, as regards Sri Lanka (Cases Nos. 988/1003), Morocco (Case No. 1077), Pakistan (Case No. 1175), India (Case No. 1227) and the United Kingdom (Case No. 1261), the Committee again requests the governments concerned to keep it informed of developments in these cases. The Committee hopes that these governments will communicate this information at an early date.

19. In addition, the Committee notes with concern that, despite the time which has elapsed since the Governing Body requested certain governments to keep it informed of measures taken to give effect to its recommendations, these governments' replies have not been received. In this respect, the Committee would point out that, in accordance with the procedural rules set out in paragraphs 27 and 28 of its 127th Report, approved by the Governing Body, if there is no reply or if the reply given is partly or entirely unsatisfactory, the matter should be followed up periodically through invitations to the Director-General at suitable intervals, according to the nature of each case, to remind the government concerned of the matter and to request it to supply information as to the action taken on the recommendations approved by the Governing Body. The Committee itself will, from time to time, report on the situation.

20. In these circumstances, the Committee recalls those requests made some time ago and which remain without response. At its November 1984 meeting, the Committee invited the Government of Ecuador (Case No. 1230) to inform it of the outcome of the trial before the Second Criminal Court of Chimborazo concerning the circumstances surrounding the death, on 17 June 1983, of two Culluctuc trade unionists, Mr. Pedro Cuji and Mrs. Felipa Pucha, and the wounding of three peasants who were members of the Culluctuc Indigenous Community. At its November 1984 meeting, it also requested the Government of Barbados (Case No. 1264) to keep it informed of the outcome of the measures taken by the Chief Labour Officer towards recognition of the National Union of Public Workers for the purposes of collective bargaining. Lastly, at its May 1984 meeting, the Committee expressed its serious concern in the case of Honduras (Case No. 1268) at the lack of information on the circumstances surrounding the disappearance of the trade union leader, Rolando Vindel González, and requested the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of the court inquiries underway. Not having received the replies and information requested from the governments on these various points, the Committee invites the Director-General to bring these matters to the attention of the governments concerned and request them to send their replies urgently so as to enable the Committee, at its next meeting, to make a further assessment of the situation in each case.

21. With regard to Cases Nos. 1135 (Ghana), 1146 (Iraq) and 1237 (Brazil), the Committee regrets that, despite repeated appeals, the respective governments have not replied to the Committee's requests to be kept informed of developments in the various cases. The Committee wishes to recall that:

In Case No. 1135 (Ghana), it had requested the Government to inform it of any measures which might be taken to terminate the freeze on the bank accounts of the trade unionists who were in exile. In this respect the Committee repeats its conclusion that, if, following investigation, no evidence is found to prove any misappropriation of trade union funds, it would be unreasonable to continue the freeze of the unionists' accounts whether they are in the country or not;

In Case No. 1146 (Iraq), the Committee requested the Government to send it the text of the judgement sentencing to death the leaders of the General Federation of Trade Unions in Iraq, Messrs. Mohamed Ayesh and Baden Fadel, who, according to the Government, had ceased to be union leaders well before being tried and sentenced to death for espionage and conspiracy against the security of the State. The Committee once again expresses its regret that the Government has not transmitted the text of the judgement handed down in this matter;

In Case No. 1237 (Brazil), the Committee requested the Government to communicate a copy of the judgements, together with the reasons adduced therefor, handed down against those responsible for the death of the trade union leader, Margarita Maria Alves, in August 1983. In this respect the Committee would once again recall that trade union rights can only be exercised in a climate that is free from violence, pressure or threats of any kind against trade unionists, and that it is for governments to ensure that this principle is respected.

22. 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 the Governing Body.

IRRECEIVABLE COMPLAINT

23. By a communication dated 28 June 1985 the Staff Union of the European Patent Organisation presented a complaint of alleged violation of trade union rights against that organisation. By virtue of the procedure in force, the Committee can only examine complaints presented against States. The Committee, accordingly, recommends the Governing Body to decide that the complaint in question is irreceivable.