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 21, 22 and 26 May 1986 under the chairmanship of Mr. Roberto Ago, former Chairman of the Governing Body.

2. The members of the Committee of Argentinian, New Zealand, Spanish and Australian nationality were not present during the examination of the cases relating to Argentina (Case No. 1220), New Zealand (Case No. 1334), Spain (Case No. 1342) and Australia (Case No. 1345), respectively.

3. The Committee is currently seized of 61 cases (this figure includes the cases relating to Turkey (Cases Nos. 997, 999 and 1029) which are examined in the 245th Report) in which the complaints have been submitted to the governments concerned for observations. At its present meeting it examined 25 cases in substance, reaching definitive conclusions in 13 cases and interim conclusions in 12 cases; the remaining cases were adjourned for the various reasons set out in the following paragraphs.

4. New cases: The Committee adjourned until its next meeting the cases relating to Peru (Cases Nos. 1363 and 1367), France (Case No. 1364), Portugal (Case No. 1365), Spain (Case No. 1366), Paraguay (Case No. 1368) and Honduras (Case No. 1369), 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 or information concerning the cases relating to El Salvador (Cases Nos. 953, 973, 1168 and 1273), Belgium (Case No. 1250), Honduras (Case No. 1271), Paraguay (Cases Nos. 1275 and 1341), Guyana (Case No. 1330), Morocco (Case No. 1340) and Canada/Quebec (Case No. 1356). As for Case No. 1352 (Israel), the Committee is still awaiting receipt of further information requested from the complainant organisation. As regards Cases Nos. 1358 and 1362 (Spain), the Government has informed the Committee that it will send its observations once it has the information requested from the competent national bodies. The Committee again adjourned these cases and requests the governments concerned to transmit their observations.

6. As regards the cases relating to Tunisia (Case No. 1327), India (Case No. 1346), Greece (Case No. 1357) and Pakistan (Case No. 1359), the Committee has only recently received the governments' observations and intends to examine these cases in substance at its next meeting.

7. As regards Cases Nos. 1130 (United States) and 1219 (Liberia), the Committee notes that detailed observations from the governments have been received in reply to the complaints. In view, however, of the recent receipt of further communications from the complainants containing information on both cases and the transmission of these communications to the Governments of the United States and Liberia respectively, the Committee decided to adjourn its examination of these cases to await any additional observations from these governments. In addition, a communication has been recently received from the United States Government concerning Case No. 1130 informing the Committee that the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers - to which the complainant organisation is affiliated - filed suit on 10 April 1986 in the US District Court concerning similar allegations as those before the Committee; it undertakes to inform the Committee of developments in this litigation.

8. As regards the cases relating to the Philippines (Cases Nos. 1157, 1192 and 1353), in a communication dated 28 April 1986, the Government states that recent political developments have resulted in a complete change of government in the Philippines. It states that the promotion of human rights, social justice and improved working and living conditions shall remain the paramount objectives in the field of labour and employment. The President of the Republic has pledged the administration's dedication towards improving the workers' condition, and reforms aimed at restoring the once restricted rights of workers and trade unions are imminent. The Government also supplies certain details on Case No. 1353. It concludes with a request that, in the circumstances, the Committee adjourn action on these cases. The Committee takes note of this statement with interest and trusts that a detailed reply on Case No. 1353 and the additional information requested on Cases Nos. 1157 and 1192 will be transmitted to the Committee for consideration at its next meeting.

9. As regards Cases Nos. 1129, 1169, 1298, 1344, 1351 and 1361 (Nicaragua) concerning complaints presented by various trade union organisations and the International Organisation of Employers, the Committee regrets that the Government has only supplied partial information on some of these cases, and other information which was requested some time ago has still not been received. The Committee urges the Government to transmit detailed information on all the outstanding questions in these cases so as to enable the Committee to examine them at its next meeting.

10. With regard to Case No. 1338 (Denmark), in which the Committee reached definitive conclusions in its 243rd Report, (adopted by the Governing Body at its 232nd Session, March 1986), the complainants have communicated further information on 19 May 1986 to the effect that the Government, without consulting the social partners, has announced its intention to abolish the provisions concerning wage indexation. According to the complainants, this action is not in conformity with the recommendation of the Committee that the Government re-examine with the occupational organisations concerned the possibility of negotiating wage settlements in a manner that is free of interference by the public authorities. The complainants request that consideration be given to undertaking a direct contacts mission to examine with the social partners and the Government this alleged intervention in the right to free collective bargaining. The Government, to whom the above communication was transmitted for comment, replied in a communication dated 22 May 1986. The Committee proposes to examine these matters at its next meeting in the light of all the information that has been communicated to it and in the light of any further developments that may take place.

Direct contacts

11. As regards Case No. 1266 (Burkina Faso), the Committee, at its November 1985 meeting, addressed an urgent appeal to the Government for the release of the trade union leaders still in administrative detention and for the reinstatement of all of the teachers who had been dismissed for having participated in a peaceful 48-hour protest strike in March 1984. In a communication dated 14 April 1986, the Government states that on 15 January and 5 February 1986, 251 dismissed teachers had been reinstated and that the Ministry of Labour was working on the definitive settlement of the case of the teachers who had instigated the illegal strike. It adds that it repeats its invitation to the ILO to come and verify on the spot the industrial relations situation in Burkina Faso. The Committee welcomes the fact that the Government is willing to receive a mission to the country and decides to adjourn this case to await the results of such a mission which, it hopes, will be able to take place at an early date.

Conference contacts

12. Following its examination of the cases relating to Turkey (Cases Nos. 997, 999 and 1029) and Colombia (Case No. 1343), the Committee authorised its Chairman to contact the representatives of the Governments of Turkey and Colombia attending the International Labour Conference in order to discuss appropriate ways or procedures through which the Committee may pursue its examination of any questions relating to these cases which remain outstanding.

URGENT APPEAL

13. The Committee observes that, in spite of the time which has elapsed since the last examination of Case No. 1339 (Dominican Republic) and the seriousness of the allegations therein, the observations and information requested of the Government have not been received. The Committee draws the Government's 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 this case even if the Government's observations have not been received at that date. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to transmit its 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); 1332 (Pakistan); 1349 (Malta).

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

15. As regards Case No. 792 concerning Japan, the World Confederation of Organisations of the Teaching Profession, in a communication of 20 November 1985, informed the Committee that Messrs. Makieda and Masuda, leaders of the Japanese Teachers' Union (NIKKYOSO), had been sentenced by the High Court of Tokyo to terms of imprisonment of six months and three months respectively, these sentences being suspended for one year. The WCOTP added that these persons had appealed to the Japanese Supreme Court. At its February 1986 meeting, the Committee took note of this information and requested the Government to transmit its observations on the matter, which relates to a one-day teachers' strike in 1974. In communications dated 26 February and 14 May 1986, the Government confirms that sentences have been passed but appealed and states that Convention No. 87 does not deal with the question of the right to strike. Moreover, the strike in respect of which these sentences were passed was an economic and political one, part of a pre-arranged programme, and therefore illegal. The Government adds that, since judicial power is exercised by the courts independent of and separate from the executive in Japan, it is awaiting the decision of the Supreme Court on the case. The Committee notes this information and recalls that it has acknowledged that the right to strike may be restricted or even prohibited in the civil service - civil servants being those who act on behalf of the public authorities - or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, i.e. services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee considers, however, that teachers do not fall within the above definition of essential services. It draws the Government's attention - as has the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations in its observations on Japan's application of Convention No. 87 - to the principle that penal sanctions should only be imposed where there are violations of strike prohibitions that are in conformity with the principles of freedom of association. The Committee accordingly urges the Government to re-examine its legislation in the light of the above considerations and to keep it informed of the outcome of the appeal against the prison sentences lodged by the union leaders in this case.

16. As regards Cases Nos. 1057 and 1167 (Greece) which relate to complaints presented by the Panhellenic Unions of Merchant Marine Engineers (PEMEN) and Mechanics (PENEN) concerning their exclusion from the trade union legislation enacted in 1982, the Committee reached definitive conclusions in its 211th and 226th Reports (paras. 166 to 176 and 57 to 68, respectively). In a communication dated 15 April 1986, the Government indicates that a committee, comprising maritime officials and specialists on trade union questions, has been set up. This committee has prepared a draft law which has been distributed to all the parties for their views on the text before it is drawn up in final form. In addition the Ministry of the Mercantile Marine will take account of the proposals made by this committee when the draft law on seamen's trade unionism reaches the final stage of elaboration. Finally, the Government adds that the Panhellenic Maritime Federation (PNO) comprises 14 trade unions which cover the whole range of occupational marine branches and that each union endeavours to resolve the particular problem affecting its branch of activity. However, in view of the voting strength in the various unions and the terms of the PNO by-laws only two unions - i.e. PEMEN and PENEN - would be able to obtain the majority over the other unions and this would weaken the representation of these other unions. The Committee takes note of this information and recalls that the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations will continue to follow developments in this matter.

17. As regards Case No. 1100 (India), the Committee had requested the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of the Supreme Court case concerning the General Insurance Business (Nationalisation) Act. In a communication dated 9 May 1986 the Government states that the case is still sub judice and that it will inform the Committee of the final position as soon as the judgement is delivered. The Committee takes note of this and looks forward to receiving information on further developments shortly.

18. As regards the case concerning Chile (Case No. 1191), the Committee had requested the Government - in paragraph 18 of its 243rd Report (February 1986) - to keep it informed of developments concerning the appeals pending before the Supreme Court relating to the alleged ill-treatment of several trade unionists. In a communication dated 7 May 1986, the Government repeats the information supplied previously to the effect that the matter is still at the indictment stage, and is being held in secret so that it is impossible to send information on the judicial investigations. The Committee takes note of this information and hopes that the Government will be able to supply the information requested shortly.

19. As regards Case No. 1227 (India), the Committee had requested the Government to inform it of the decision taken by the Special Industrial Tribunal concerning the legality of the retrenchments in February 1983 in the J.K. Synthetics Ltd. factory (State of Rajasthan). In a communication of 9 May 1986, the Government states that the Special Industrial Tribunal (Jaipur) decided in favour of the reinstatement of all the remaining suspended workers and that all have been taken back on duty except for one person (Mr. Ram Swarup Sharma) whose case was not covered by the Tribunal's award because he was suspended on charges of fraudulently obtaining employment for another person. The Government adds that the dispute has now been conclusively settled. The Committee takes note of this information with interest.

20. In Case No. 1230 (Ecuador), the Committee had requested the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of the criminal trial under way into the murder of two trade union leaders, Mr. Pedro Cuji and Mrs. Felipa Pucha. In a communication dated 22 April 1986, the Government supplies documents concerning the trial before the Second Penal Court of Chimborazo and gives a detailed description of the developments following the judicial proceedings. It states that final judgements have not yet been handed down and that the Minister of Labour has ordered the National Public Prosecutor to request the competent judges to give a definitive decision. The Committee is awaiting receipt from the Government of the final decision in the judicial proceedings.

21. With regard to Case No. 1261 (United Kingdom), the Government, in a communication dated 2 May 1986, referred to the submission it had previously made in relation to the Committee's recommendations and provided additional information to the effect that there had been an application concerning the issue involved in the case to the European Commission on Human Rights, in respect of which it had forwarded its observations on 22 January 1986. It also referred to correspondence and discussions which had taken place between the Government and representatives of the Council of Civil Service Unions on the matter in 1985 and 1986, and to information which had been provided by the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs in Parliament concerning the most recent meeting which had taken place on 18 March 1986. The Committee notes that none of these discussions have related to the question of the right of the workers at the General Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) to establish and join organisations of their own choosing, without previous authorisation, and accordingly urges the Government once again to enter into negotiations which could lead to a resolution of the problem and to the implementation of the principles of freedom of association.

22. As regards Case No. 1264 (Barbados), concerning which the Committee reached definitive conclusions in November 1984 and again called on the Government to supply certain follow-up information in February 1986 (243rd Report, para. 25, approved by the Governing Body at its 232nd Session, February-March 1986), the Government has sent further information in a letter dated 4 April 1986 stating that, in the matter of recognition of the National Union of Public Workers (NUPW) for the purposes of collective bargaining in the National Bank, the Chief Labour Officer has now completed the survey to determine the percentage membership of the National Bank's staff in the NUPW. The results were transmitted both to the Bank and the NUPW in February 1986. The matter has not yet been resolved and the Chief Labour Officer will continue his efforts to bring about a settlement. The Committee notes this information but must point out that the original recognition dispute dates from 1980 and that, since then, collective bargaining between the Bank and its employees has apparently been paralysed as a result. The Committee can only express the firm hope that the Chief Labour Officer will resolve the dispute speedily and in such a manner that the guarantees of Article 4 of Convention No. 98 - ratified by Barbados - will be ensured to the workers concerned.

23. As regards Case No. 1279 (Portugal), the Committee pointed out at its February 1985 meeting that the civilian workers in the Armed Forces manufacturing establishments should have the right to establish organisations of their own choosing without previous authorisation in accordance with Convention No. 87, ratified by Portugal, and requested the Government to take the necessary measures in this respect. In a communication dated 18 April 1986 the Government states that it has duly taken account of the Committee's recommendation and is awaiting the results of the litigation which has been instituted on this matter before the Supreme Administrative Tribunal. The Committee takes note of this information and hopes that the workers in question will be granted the right to set up organisations of their own choosing. It requests the Government to transmit the decision of the Supreme Administrative Tribunal as soon as it is handed down.

24. As regards Case No. 1308 (Grenada) concerning which the Committee reached definitive conclusions at its February meeting (see 243rd Report, paras. 63 to 73), the Government, in a letter dated 18 April 1986, communicated a detailed list of all the charges brought against Mr. Chester Humphrey, the trade unionist involved in the case. The Committee takes note of this information and can only express its regret that it was not made available by the Government at an earlier date.

25. As regards Case No. 1348 (Ecuador), in a communication dated 22 April 1986, the Government states that the appeal before the Administrative Court concerning the refusal to register the National Union of Workers and Employees in the Equatorian Institute of Telecommunications (IETEL) has reached the final stage prior to the handing down of a judgement and that the Ministry of Labour has requested the Court to hand down its decision as rapidly as the law permits. The Government adds that in IETEL there are more than 40 trade union organisations. It expresses its surprise and concern over some of the Committee's conclusions, in particular, those which are in favour of recognising the right to bargain collectively of the IETEL workers. In this connection, the Committee would point out that the provisions of Convention No. 98 and, in particular, the terms of Article 4 (promotion of collective bargaining) although not applying to public servants in the administration of the State (Article 6 of the Convention) do apply, however to the other categories of public servants. Finally, the Committee awaits information from the Government on the outcome of the appeal trial relating to the refusal to register the National Union of Workers and Employees in IETEL, once the sentence is handed down.

26. Lastly, as regards Sri Lanka (Cases Nos. 988/1003), the Central African Republic (Case No. 1040), the United States (Case No. 1074), Pakistan (Case No. 1175), Kenya (Case No. 1189), Canada/British Columbia (Cases Nos. 1235 and 1350), the Dominican Republic (Cases Nos. 1277/1288), Morocco (Case No. 1282) and Greece (Case No. 1354), 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.