Interim Report - Report No 81, 1965

Case No 373 (Haiti) - Complaint date: 02-JAN-64 - Closed

1. 106. This case already came before the Committee at its 38th Session in November 1964. The case consisted of two sets of allegations: one relating to the dissolution of the Inter-Union Federation of Haiti (U.I.H.) and the other referring to the arrest of trade union leaders and officials. The Committee submitted its final conclusions to the Governing Body in regard to the first set of allegations in paragraphs 210 to 220 and 224 (a) of its 78th Report, approved by the Governing Body at its 160th Session (November 1964). With respect to the second set of allegations the Committee felt it necessary to seek further information from the Government before submitting its final conclusions to the Governing Body, and made a recommendation to this effect to the Governing Body, which approved it. The paragraphs which follow deal only with the matters which remain outstanding.

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 107. The complainants allege that, parallel with the action taken to dissolve U.I.H, the Government arranged for the arbitrary arrest of a number of trade union leaders and officials. The persons arrested included Mr. Ulrick Joly, President of the Federation, Messrs. Claude François and Léon Gabriel, members of the Executive Committee and presidents, respectively, of the cement and sugar workers' unions, Messrs. Alcius Cadet and Arnold Maisoneuve, of the boat-breakers' union, and the union officials Messrs. Prossoir and Guerrior.
2. 108. Noting that in the various communications it had addressed to the I.L.O the Government had failed to furnish any observations on this aspect of the case, and bearing in mind the fact that specific allegations of a rather serious character had been made, the Committee recommended the Governing Body to request the Government to be good enough to furnish its observations in this connection)
3. 109. This request was conveyed to the Government by a letter from the Director-General dated 23 November 1964, to which the Government replied by a communication dated 8 December 1964.
4. 110. In its reply the Government states that the inquiry carried out by the Haitian police into the activities of the persons named by the World Federation of Trade Unions has shown that for some time past they had been engaging in subversive activities with a view to overthrowing the Constitutionally established régime. To be more precise, these persons, officials of the Inter-Union Federation of Haiti, acting on orders from political groups abroad, were waging a terrorist campaign characterised in the main by acts of aggression against representatives of the State, as for instance at Fort - Liberté, where the local civil authorities narrowly escaped an ambush prepared for them by the leaders of U.I.H.
5. 111. When it examined the case at its November 1964 session the Committee observed that it was quite clear from the explanations furnished by the Government, as well as from the text of the judgment ordering the suspension of the activities of U.I.H appended to the Government's observations, that that organisation had been engaging in political activities outside the framework of normal trade union activities. It now appears from the explanations furnished by the Government in its communication of 8 December 1964 that the leaders of the organisation whose activities have been suspended are individually guilty of illegal acts of a political and not a trade union nature.
6. 112. However, while it mentions a police inquiry in its reply, the Government does not specify whether the action taken against these persons was the outcome of court proceedings or not.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 113. In view of the importance which the Committee has always attached to the observance of adequate judicial safeguards in cases where trade unionists are accused of political offences or unlawful acts-including the right of all detained persons to receive a fair trial at the earliest possible moment -the Committee considers that, before it can submit its final conclusions on the case, it needs to know whether the action taken against the persons named by W.F.T.U was in implementation of a sentence, and if so, by what authority sentence was pronounced.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 114. It therefore recommends the Governing Body to request the Government to be good enough to furnish the additional information indicated above, and pending receipt thereof to postpone examination of the case.