Definitive Report - Report No 30, 1960

Case No 125 (Brazil) - Complaint date: 04-AUG-55 - Closed

1. 29. On 4 August 1955 the World Federation of Trade Unions presented a complaint against the Government of Brazil, and this was transmitted to the I.L.O by the Secretary-General of the United Nations on 18 August of the same year. The complaint contained allegations relating to entry by the police into the office of trade union publications and the arrest of trade unionists. The allegations were communicated to the Government, which presented its observations on 15 May 1956.
2. 30. At its 14th Session (May 1956) the Committee decided to adjourn its examination of the case until its next session (November 1956), when it submitted an interim report recommending the Governing Body to decide that the allegations regarding entry into the premises did not call for further examination and postponing final consideration of the case pending receipt of additional information on the arrested trade union leaders. The Governing Body approved this report at its 133rd Session (Geneva, November 1956).
3. 31. The Government was asked for additional information in a letter dated 30 November 1956. It replied on 20 February 1957, stating that proceedings were being taken against the persons mentioned in the complaint.
4. 32. At its 16th, 17th, 18th and 19th Sessions the Committee, not having yet received the information expected from the Government as to the result of the said proceedings, decided to postpone consideration of the case until this information should arrive. The Government finally communicated the result of the proceedings in a letter dated 19 July 1958.
5. 33. Having regard to what is stated in paragraph 30, only the allegation concerning the arrest of trade unionists is examined below.

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 34. The World Federation of Trade Unions stated on 4 August 1955 that the Rio de Janeiro police authorities had arrested several trade union leaders, including Ramiro Lucchesi, Roberto Morena and Moacyr Ramos Silva. This complaint, addressed to the United Nations, was transmitted to the I.L.O on 18 August 1955.
2. 35. In its reply of 15 May 1956 the Brazilian Government states that the police had raided the offices of a periodical-devoted in theory to trade union questions-with the object of investigating subversive activities; this operation had been carried out with due regard for the legal provisions in force, and the persons detained received the assistance allowed by law in such cases. On 20 February 1957 the Government amplified its reply, stating that proceedings were being taken against the persons mentioned in the W.F.T.U complaint, in respect of acts punishable under sections 9 and 10 of Law No. 1802; and that they were provisionally at liberty.
3. 36. The relevant sections of Law No. 1802 read as follows:
   • Section 1. Those crimes are regarded as crimes against the State and the political and social order which are defined in and punishable under ... this Law, namely: ...
   • Section 9. To reorganise or to attempt to reorganise, in fact or in law, to attempt to put into immediate and effective operation, even under a false name or simulated farm, a political party or association dissolved in accordance with legal provisions, or to cause it to function in the same conditions when it has been legally suspended. Penalty : imprisonment for from two to five years-to be reduced by half in the case of an offence against the second part of this section.
   • The grant of registration to a new party, once approved by judgment, will terminate any proceeding or penalty based on this section.
   • Section 10. To affiliate with or to aid by services or gifts, openly or secretly but, in any event, unequivocally, any association reconstituted of functioning according to the provisions of the preceding Article. Penalty : imprisonment from one to four years.
4. 37. In a letter dated 19 July 1958 the Brazilian Government transmitted the full text of the judgment in these proceedings. This stated that Ramiro Lucchesi, Roberto Morena, Agostinho José de Carbalho, José Lelis da Costa and Moacyr Ramos Silva had been charged with carrying on subversive activities in the interests of the Communist movement, organising and fomenting strikes, holding political discussions, steering these into tendentious channels, pursuing disruptive aims, and for these purposes claiming to be leaders of the dissolved Brazilian Confederation of Labour. Allegations relating to the dissolution of that Confederation in 1948 were examined by the Committee in 1953 in Case No. 11 relating to Brazil I and have not again been raised in the present case, in which the complaint relates only to the arrests of certain trade unionists in 1955.
5. 38. In the final part of his judgment the magistrate reached the conclusion that a crime within the meaning of section 9 of Law No. 1802 could only be held to have been committed if the activities in question constituted a definite reorganisation or attempted reorganisation of a political party or association which had been dissolved by law. This had not been proved during the proceedings, nor had the acts specified and sanctioned in section 10, which could only follow those mentioned in section 9. Accordingly, the magistrate dismissed the charge and acquitted the accused.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 39. In these circumstances the Committee, while emphasising the importance which it has always attached to due process of law, and drawing attention, as it has done in previous cases, to the danger that arrest by the police of trade unionists concerning whom no grounds for conviction are subsequently found may cause considerable prejudice to the activities and interests of their organisations, and to the importance of the police authorities having instructions appropriate to eliminate the danger of detention for trade union activities, recommends the Governing Body to note that the persons mentioned in the complaint have been acquitted after a previous provisional release, and to decide that for this reason no useful purpose would be served by examining the case further.