Definitive Report - REPORT_NO89, 1966

CASE_NUMBER 463 (Democratic Republic of the Congo) - COMPLAINT_DATE: 18-DEZ-65 - Closed

1. 77. The complaint of the Union of African Workers (U.S.T.A.) is contained in a communication dated 18 December 1965, supplemented by a further communication dated 13 January 1966. The texts of these communications were transmitted to the Government for its observations, and the Government replied by a letter dated 26 January 1966.
2. 78. Congo (Leopoldville) has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), or the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 79. The essence of the allegations is that, following action in support of demands initiated by U.S.T.A with a view to obtaining payment of arrears of wages to certain categories of workers (teachers, etc.), Mr. Dibala-Banayi, the National President of the complaining organisation, which is affiliated to the Congo General Federation of Labour (F.G.T.K.), was arrested by order of the Luluabourg authorities. From the additional information furnished by the complainants, and signed by Mr. Dibala-Banayi himself, it appears that he was kept in custody for 72 hours.
2. 80. In its observations the Government states that, following an intervention by F.G.T.K, the person concerned was released shortly after his arrest. The Government adds that since these events took place the situation of the teachers, nurses and other public employees has been considerably improved. The Government declares further that the General Secretary of F.G.T.K, of which U.S.T.A is an affiliate, has stated that his organisation regards the matter as closed. In conclusion, the Government states that it has drawn the attention of the Luluabourg provincial government to the importance of respecting and protecting freedom of association.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 81. In these circumstances, in view of the information given above, the Committee considers that it would be purposeless to pursue the matter further and recommends the Governing Body to decide that the case does not call for further examination.