Interim Report - Report No 218, November 1982

Case No 1054 (Morocco) - Complaint date: 23-JUN-81 - Closed

506. The Committee has already examined this case at its meeting in February 1982, at which it submitted an interim report to the Governing Body. Since then, several organisations have sent additional information and allegations: the Democratic Confederation of Labour (CDT) (24 and 29 April, 25 May and 15 June 1982), the World Confederation of Organisations of the Teaching Profession (WCOTP) (24 May 1982) and the Organisation of African Trade Union Unity (OATUU) (10 July 1982). The Government communicated certain observations in letters dated 27 July and 1 October 1982.

1. 506. The Committee has already examined this case at its meeting in February 1982, at which it submitted an interim report to the Governing Body. Since then, several organisations have sent additional information and allegations: the Democratic Confederation of Labour (CDT) (24 and 29 April, 25 May and 15 June 1982), the World Confederation of Organisations of the Teaching Profession (WCOTP) (24 May 1982) and the Organisation of African Trade Union Unity (OATUU) (10 July 1982). The Government communicated certain observations in letters dated 27 July and 1 October 1982.
2. 507. Morocco has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87); it has ratified the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. Previous examination of the case

• (a) The complainants' allegations
  508. 508 The complaints of the three major international workers confederations - the ICFTU, the WCL and the WFTU - of the national confederation, called the Democratic Confederation of Labour (CDT), and of various international trade union organisations, expressed their very grave concern at the repression suffered by several trade union leaders and militants in Morocco following the general strike of 20 June 1981 in Casablanca.
  509. 509 The complainant organisations had explained the events of 20 June 1981 as follows:
       • The Democratic Confederation of Labour, which claims to be the most representative organisation in Morocco, said it had organised a general strike throughout the country. The CDT explained in its initial complaint that the strike call, which was widely heeded by the workers, followed several attempts to open a constructive and responsible dialogue with the Government. A list of demands had been presented to the Prime Minister, calling essentially for a general wage increase of 50 per cent on account of the steep rise in the prices of essential commodities (from 14 to 74 per cent); an increase in the minimum wage to 1,200 dinars; guaranteed employment and respect for trade union rights; and an end to dismissals and the reinstatement of dismissed workers. According to the CDT, the Government had refused to commence consultations with the workers representatives, and consequently the CDT, in accordance with article 14 of the National Constitution expressly recognising the right to strike, called a general strike. The CDT specified that the purpose of this strike was not agitation or incitement to violence but the assertion of the workers rights and the opening of a dialogue.
  510. 510 However, according to the CDT, on 18 June 1981 trade union premises had been surrounded by the police and a large number of trade unionists had been arrested. On 19 June repression had continued, with a wave of intimidation, police shadowing, watches kept on homes of militants and open threats on radio and television against the workers, some of whom had been forced to give written promises not to strike. The Secretary-General of the CDT, Noubir Amaoui, and the members of the executive Committee had been summoned to the prefecture in Casablanca and then arrested. Lastly, over 1,000 people had been arrested during demonstrations and it was to be regretted that dozens of people had been killed.
  511. 511 All of the complainant organisations had further denounced massive arrests of trade unionists. The WCL, for its part, reported in addition 600 dead, several hundred wounded and thousands of arrests. According to the WCL, certain persons had been pursued and killed inside their houses. The corpses had not been handed over to their families and had been taken to unknown places. Most of the victims, according to the WCL, had been hit by pistol or rifle bullets, contrary to the information given by the Government, according to which the victims (66 dead and 110 wounded officially) had been wounded by weapons used in hand-to-hand fighting, blunt instruments or stones.
  512. 512 The WFTU, for its part, attached to its complaint a dossier published by the CDT describing the background of the events and the results of the demonstrations which, according to the Confederation, ended with more than 700 persons killed, thousands wounded, over 8,000 arrests, 100 summary trials and numerous dismissals of workers and arbitrary transfers of civil servants. This dossier also contained the letter sent by the executive Committee of the CDT on 11 June 1981 to the Prime Minister in which the Confederation demanded a wage increase equivalent to the increase in prices, the application of the sliding scale and the revision of the minimum wage, and the opening of a dialogue on the "claims file which has been in abeyance for years". It emerged further from the dossier that the court of the first instance had declared itself incompetent in the trials of four national leaders of the CDT, namely Noubir Amaoui, Secretary-General, and Chennaf Abderahman, Mohammed Lamrani and Lakbir Bazzaoui, members of the executive Committee.
  513. 513 Lastly, the complainants attached to their communications a list of nearly 200 trade union leaders and militants arrested following this labour dispute, most of wham have been sentenced to 1 to 12 months in prison, and ten of whom have been sentenced to 36 months in prison; some, however, have been acquitted. In addition, following appeals, certain sentences have been increased and others reduced. The complainants also mentioned the dismissal of 39 trade union leaders in the water, electricity, urban transport, post and telecommunications, mining and industry sectors.
• (b) Requests for direct contacts
  514. 514 Faced with the gravity of the events which occurred at the time of the general strike of 20 June 1981, the International Labour Office had requested the Government, in a letter of 18 August 1981, to communicate its intentions regarding the possibility of an on-the-spot mission being carried out by a representative of the Director-General. However, in the absence of a reply from the Government on this point, in November 1981 the Committee asked it for the first time, as a matter of urgency, to supply its observations as well as a reply to the request for an on-the-spot mission.
• (c) The Government's reply
  515. 515 In its communication of 3 December 1981, the Government recalled that the right to strike is guaranteed by article 14 of the National constitution and added that the exercise of the right to strike may in no way be construed to mean threats, pressure and interference with the right to work.
  516. 516 With regard to the events of 20 June 1981, the Government considered that the real motives of the instigators of the general strike had much more to do with politics than with trade union matters. According to the Government, it was a political party which had issued the strike call along with a trade union, and this same party had mobilised considerable human and material resources for the organisation of the strike. The strike had been eminently political and, moreover, the other trade unions, the Moroccan Union of Labour and the General Union of Moroccan Workers, had opposed the strike, stated the Government.
  517. 517 In the Government's view, the increase in prices invoked to justify the strike was not a sufficient ground because, several days previously, after consulting the political parties and trade union organisations, the Government had decided to reduce the amount of the increase by half and to raise the salaries of civil servants by 13 per cent following an increase of 20 per cent in the minimum wage. Moreover, the strike of 20 June came only two days after that called by the Moroccan Union of Labour with which the CDT was associated. That strike had taken place peacefully and the authorities had not been obliged to intervene.
  518. 518 The Government considered that the strike call of 20 June had been a failure, and that the instigators of the movement had not hesitated to incite children to commit acts of aggression and vandalism (throwing stones at buses, threats, pressure and violence against people refusing to take part in the strike, setting ---------- fire to public buildings, attempts to destroy water mains and setting up of stone barricades, attempts on the life of innocent people and attacks on their property). All these acts, according to the Government, had resulted in the death of 66 persons, mostly among the police force, and in considerable material damage. The authorities had therefore had to intervene in order to re-establish order, to ensure the safety of citizens and to protect public and private property in Casablanca. They had arrested and brought before the courts the agitators and the instigators of the strike, who had proved incapable of controlling it: out of 2,800 persons who had been arrested, 1,700 had been released. The remaining 1,100 had been brought before the courts. Seventy per cent of the persons prosecuted had been brought before the criminal courts owing to the criminal nature of the acts committed. All of the accused had enjoyed the guarantees provided for by the Code of Criminal Procedure. They had been tried in public hearings and in the presence of their lawyers. Appeals had been lodged against all of the sentences given in the first instance and, on review, many of the sentences had been reduced. Others had even been quashed and the persons acquitted.
  519. 519 In addition, in its communication of 22 December 1981, the Government had recalled that the increase in prices decided on for compelling budgetary reasons had been the subject of a broad debate with political and trade union organisations and that, as a result of the dialogue so established, it had been decided to reduce the over-all package of increases by 50 per cent. The Socialist Union of People's Forces (USFP) and its trade union, the CDT, despite the fact that they had participated in the dialogue, had on the eve of the strike of 20 June illegally distributed tracts attacking the Government and calling for a strike. The Government had had to arrest the distributors of tracts, who were caught red-handed; moreover, according to the Government, the period and date chosen for calling the strike revealed the dubious nature of the organisers intentions: shortly before, the King of Morocco had announced his intention of attending the summit of the Organisation of African Unity in Nairobi with a proposal for a solution in the North-West African conflict. The day chosen for the strike was a Saturday, this was to be accounted for by the limited extent of the audience of the CDT, which was able to conceal the little support the strike had among workers, directing its action towards the already crowded Saturday streets. The instigators had then proceeded to violence through acts of vandalism and the leaders of the strike had been conspicuous by their absence, thus showing the weakness of their position and their inability to control the situation. In conclusion, the Government stated that the CDT was only a "puppet" of the Socialist Union of People's Forces, which was using it for its own purposes. It also stated that dialogue was always open through democratic channels.
  520. 520 Lastly, in a communication of 14 January 1982, with regard to the request for direct contacts, the Government stated that it was not necessary to send a mission to Morocco, in view of the detailed observations which it had provided.
• (d) Previous conclusions of the Committee
  521. 521 At its meeting in March 1982, the Governing Body, on the Committee's proposal, had had to conclude as follows:
       • - It expressed its concern at the gravity of the events which took place during the general strike of 20 June 1981 called by the Democratic Confederation of Labour.
       • - Regarding the proposal of an on-the-spot mission, it considered that such a mission would contribute to a better knowledge of the trade union situation and to a useful examination of possible solutions to the problems raised. It therefore expressed the firm hope that the Government would, in the light of the Committee's considerations, be able to agree shortly to the proposal that a representative of the Director-General should go to the country to discuss the matters at issue.
       • - Regarding the reasons for the general strike of 20 June 1981, it noted that the demands put forward by the CDT related mainly to economic and social questions. In this respect, it stressed that workers organisations should be able to express peacefully any dissatisfaction that they may feel about economic and social questions affecting the interests of their members.
       • - Regarding the death of numerous persons at the time of the demonstrations, it requested the Government to indicate whether an inquiry had been carried out into the circumstances of those deaths, and, if so, to inform it of the outcome.
       • - Regarding the arrest and conviction of trade unionists, it requested the Government for detailed information about the charges brought against the arrested trade unionists mentioned in the complaints and the precise facts on which the sentences had been based, as well as the present position of those persons. It also requested detailed information about Noubir Amaoui, Chennaf Abderahman, Mohammed Lamrani and Lakbir Bazzaoui, the national leaders of the CDT, whose cases the courts had declared that they were not competent to try.
       • - With regard to the other allegations concerning the dismissal of trade unionists and the closure of the CDT's premises, it requested the Government to provide its observations on these questions.

B. Subsequent developments

• (a) Additional information sent by the complainants
  522. 522 With a covering letter dated 24 April 1982, the executive Committee of the CDT, having noted that the Committee on Freedom of Association had requested the Government for "information on the situation of Noubir Amaoui, Chennaf Abderahman, Mohammed Lamrani and Lakbir Bazzaoui, the national leaders of the CDT, whose cases the courts had declared that they were not competent to try", added to the file a 27-page legal report, drawn up on 5 April 1982, concerning its four trade union leaders.
  523. 523 From the information contained in this report it emerges that the following national leaders of the CDT: Noubir Amaoui, Secretary-General, Chennaf Abderahman, General Treasurer and Secretary-General of the National Teachers Trade Union, Lakbir Bazzaoui, member of the executive Committee and member of the national Committee of the National Teachers Trade Union, Mohammed Lamrani, member of the executive Committee and member of the national Committee of the National Energy Trade Union, went one by one, starting from 11.30 a.m., to the headquarters of the prefecture of Casablanca on Saturday, 20 June 1981, the day of the general strike declared by the CDT, in reply to a summons by the governor of Casablanca. They were then arrested on the premises of the prefecture and taken to the Casablanca central police station without being informed of the reasons for their arrest; Mohamed Karam, Regional Secretary of the Socialist Union of People's Forces (USFP), and lawyer at the Casablanca office, and Mustapha Karchaoui, member of the administrative Committee of the USFP, editor-in-chief of the daily newspaper "Al Mouharrir" (organ of the USFP) and chairman of the municipal council of the Ain Diab Casablanca commune, were all arrested on Sunday, 21 June 1981.
  524. 524 The efforts undertaken by families and lawyers to obtain information from the police authorities about the situation of the arrested persons have been without result. They have been met by total silence. Only the governor of the town of Casablanca, Mr. Ahmed Fizazi, has implicitly admitted the fact of the arrest at an audience which he accorded to Mr. Mohamed Mensour and Mr. Mohamed Habib, deputies of Casablanca, on 29 June 1981.
  525. 525 The persons concerned were held in custody for 18 days. The CDT recalls that under the terms of sections 68 and 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the period of custody may last only up to 144 hours, on condition that the extension of the minimum period be supported by a written and well-founded authorisation of the Royal Procurator; the file however contained no written record of extension.
  526. 526 As regards the facts, states the CDT, the contents of the police records prove that the arrest of the four members of the executive Committee of the CDT took place on Saturday, 20 June 1981. They were questioned as to their timetable prior to the outbreak of events until the respective times of their arrest (Noubir Amaoui at 11.30 a.m., the others in the afternoon). In fact, the events in Casablanca took an alarming turn starting from the beginning of the afternoon on Saturday, 20 June. They continued the next day, Sunday, 21 June, and on Monday, 22 June 1981. Moreover, on the last two days repression was stepped up.
  527. 527 In addition, insists the CDT in its legal report, the detained persons had been presented as being in flagrante delicto to the Royal Procurator on 8 July 1981, whereas the events occurred on Saturday, 20 June. Moroccan law, however, requires precise circumstances for the application of the procedure of flagrante delicto, namely that the criminal act is being committed or has just been committed, that the perpetrator is still being pursued by public outcry or is carrying weapons, etc.
  528. 528 On these points, the CDT concludes that the trade unionists and their companions were not arrested at the place where the demonstrations took place and that the fact required by law for a verdict of flagrante delicto has not been established.
  529. 529 Again according to the CDT file, on 8 July 1981 the CDT leaders and their companions were charged with disrupting public order, inciting to unauthorised demonstrations, distributing subversive tracts, and threatening and using violence against a civil servant on duty.
  530. 530 The investigation records of this stage of the proceedings contain no precise information or evidence of suspicious "movements" and "contacts", nor any allusion to their "participation" in the demonstrations.
  531. 531 The accused were brought before the court of first instance of Casablanca on 11 July 1981, which handed down a verdict of flagrante delicto. The judge ordered that the case be referred for further investigation and the accused be held under arrest.
  532. 532 During the new investigation, the judge informed the defence that he had received a request from the public prosecutor to "hear members of the police force who have seen the accused committing the acts with which they have been charged" and ordered that a police inquiry be carried out by the police legal officer, who had already conducted the first police inquiry in a manner considered by the CDT to have been unlawful, as he had held the imprisoned trade union leaders for questioning for 18 days. Starting on 29 July, policemen testified that Chennaf Abderahman had appeared in an initial demonstration in order to incite the enthusiasm of the demonstrators and to encourage them to commit acts of violence, that he had allegedly disappeared suddenly only to reappear and again play the role of an instigator in a second and then a third demonstration. His fellow prisoners were alleged in these testimonies to have done the same in other areas of the town. The choice of times when the accused were alleged to have appeared in the various demonstrations was made by the police witnesses so as to be able to insert them with a degree of realism in the detailed timetable which had been required by the judge at the beginning of the investigation.
  533. 533 The CDT considers that the inquiry only served to allow the prosecution time to collect trade union communiqués and press cuttings deemed to be subversive and to produce them in support of the accusation. These documents, which were the only exhibits, were handed to the judge in an open unsealed envelope. The CDT affirms that these publications contain no call for violence or for demonstrations, that they aim to support the strike and the claims of the CDT, which they had drawn up, printed and distributed before the events of 20 June 1981, in full respect of the conditions required by law, and that their legitimacy had been recognised by the authorities as they had elicited no observations or prosecution on their part. It was not until one month after the arrest of the CDT leaders that it was discovered that these publications could be suspected of having exerted a "psychological influence on the demonstrators" and that they could be used as proof in support of a shaky accusation. This evidence made it possible to aggravate the prosecution and to bring against the imprisoned trade union leaders all the charges which had been imputed against the demonstrators.
  534. 534 The CDT leaders and their companions are now charged on the following counts: deliberately setting fire to buildings belonging to other persons (a crime set out in section 581 of the Criminal Code and punished with 10 to 20 years imprisonment), destroying buildings belonging to other persons (a crime set out in section 590 of the Criminal Code and punished with 5 to 10 years imprisonment), interfering with traffic and vehicles on the public highway (crime set out in section 591 of the Criminal Code and punished with 5 to 10 years imprisonment), destruction by fire of records or original documents of the public authority, commercial or bank instruments (crime set out in section 592 of the Criminal Code and punished with 2 to 10 years imprisonment), looting and destroying commodities, merchandise and other personal property, committed in a gang and with open use of violence (crime set out in section 594 of the Criminal Code and punished with 10 to 20 years imprisonment). The court of the first instance was declared incompetent and the case was referred to the competent criminal tribunal on the decision of the Criminal Chamber of the Court of Appeal, where, according to the CDT, on 14 October 1981 the public prosecutor stated that the strike had been directed against the State, and was therefore political and contrary to the interests of the nation at war (Sahara conflict). It was true that the law guaranteed the right to strike but it did not guarantee the exercise of this right; the CDT leaders, in declaring the strike, were therefore responsible for its consequences. Although the defendants had rebelled against violations of the law, the court approved the means used by the public prosecutor and affirmed that incitement to strike and to demonstrate justified prosecution for crimes of destruction and looting. It therefore ordered an inquiry and the imprisoned trade union leaders face sentences of 5 to 20 years prison. According to the CDT, the accused were to appear before the Criminal Chamber of the Court of Appeal of Casablanca on 17 May 1982.
  535. 535 In addition, in a new communication, the CDT denounced the prohibition of celebrating 1 May 1982 imposed on it by the Moroccan authorities, whereas all the other trade unions had been enabled and authorised to do this. The CDT further stated, in a communication of 25 May 1982, that its premises were still closed in three towns, the others having been reopened on the eve of 1 May.
  536. 536 It also specified that, following a press conference organised by its executive Committee on 6 May 1982, two national leaders, Mr. Bouzabaa and Mr. Kafouni, were arrested as journalists looked on The former was released five days after his arrest and proceedings have been instituted against him; the latter was released on the same day.
  537. 537 The WCOTP, in a communication of 24 June, confirms these facts and encloses a press communiqué of the CDT from which it emerges that Mr. Bouzabaa, Secretary-General of the National Union of Health Workers, was sentenced to one year of prison without possibility of remission and fined 1,000 dinars by the court of the first instance of Rabat for "holding a public gathering without authorisation".
  538. 538 Lastly, the Organisation of African Trade Union Unity (OATUU) joined the other complainant organisations in requesting the release of the four members of the executive Committee of the CDT imprisoned since the general strike of June 1981 and the release of the trade union leader Bouzabaa. It requests in addition that the Moroccan Government allow the CDT to carry out its activities in freedom and authorise the reopening of trade union premises of Kentra, Taza, Meknès, Klaat S. Raghna and Bengir.
• (b) Adjournment of the case in May 1982
  539. 539 The Committee on Freedom of Association, at its meeting in May 1982, in the absence of the Government's reply, had to adjourn its examination of the case. It recalled none the less that in February 1982 it had expressed its concern at the gravity of the events which took place during the general strike of 20 June 1981 and urged the Government to provide as soon as possible additional information and observations, in particular on the death of numerous persons, the arrest of trade unionists and the closure of the premises of the CDT. It had therefore expressed the firm hope that the Government would be able to respond positively to the request made by it and the Governing Body concerning a direct contact mission by a representative of the Director-General.
• (c) The Government's reply
  540. 540 In a communication of 27 July 1982, the Government replies concerning persons who were suspended or dismissed following the strike of 20 June 1981 that some of them had been suspended for 1 to 3 months and were now carrying out their work, and that two of them, Mr. Marrakchi of Rabat and Mr. Badlil of Fez, were unknown to the postal administration. Mr. Bounnit, of Casablanca, is still absent from work. The Government states that the suspension measures were taken in application of section 5 of the Decree of 5 February 1958. In addition, Mr. M. Askari, of Jerada, has been suspended since September 1981 for unjustified absence from work lasting five consecutive days, in application of section 13 of the dahir of 24 December 1960 on the status of staff of mining undertakings, and Mr. Oukhrif, also from Jerada, has been suspended since 21 November 1981 for professional incompetence, in application of section 8 of the above-mentioned dahir. As regards the dismissal of certain employees in undertakings or administrations governed by the Ministry of the -Interior, it must be made clear, adds the Government, that these measures had been taken in application of the regulations governing these undertakings, which provide for penalties such as these in the event of a strike without warning and that interference with the continuity of public services was likewise punishable by dismissal of the person responsible.
  541. 541 The Government states in addition that the Moroccan authorities have not closed trade union premises, nor have they ordered their closure, and that any assertion to the contrary constitutes propaganda and malignant statements.
  542. 542 As regards Mr. Bouzabaa, in a more recent communication of 1 October 1982, the Government specifies that the press communiqué of the CDT, which was transmitted by the WCOTP, had been distributed illegally by Mr. Abdelmajid Bouzabaa, a member of the executive Committee of the CDT, at a meeting which had been organised without previous authorisation. The Government concludes that, following this act, which was contrary to the law, this person had been charged with infringement of the law governing public freedoms and had been tried in conformity with the laws and procedures in force in Morocco.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 543. In view of the time which has elapsed since the first proposal of direct contacts addressed to the Government in August 1981, the Committee deeply deplores the failure of the Government to agree to an on-the-spot mission by a representative of the Director General to examine the questions at issue. The Committee reiterates its hope that the Government will shortly agree to such a mission, which could contribute to a better knowledge of the trade union situation and to a useful examination of possible solutions to the problems at issue. The Committee recommends the Governing Body to request the Director-General to approach the government authorities once again in order that such a mission may take place in the near future.
2. 544. In addition, the Committee, while taking note of the information and observations communicated by the Government on certain aspects of the case, deplores, as regards the death of numerous persons during the demonstrations, the fact that the Government has not communicated the information requested from it by the Committee as to whether an inquiry has been conducted into the circumstances of these deaths and the outcome of such an inquiry if one has taken place. The Committee recalls that, according to the allegations, there have been 600 dead and several hundred wounded, that bodies have not been returned to their families, that most of the victims were hit by pistol or rifle bullets and that some persons were pursued and killed inside their homes. The Committee again urges the Government, in view of the gravity of the allegations, to state whether an impartial judicial inquiry has been carried out and, if so, to communicate the outcome of this inquiry.
3. 545. As regards the arrest and sentencing of trade unionists, the Committee had requested the Government to supply detailed information on the charges that were brought against the trade unionists mentioned in the complaints as well as on the facts that gave rise to their conviction, and on the present situation of the four national leaders of the CDT, including Noubir Amaoui, in respect of whom the courts declared that they were incompetent to try their cases. The Committee notes that the Government has supplied no new information on this aspect of the case. However, the Committee points out that in its initial communication, the Government had reproached the strike leaders with having been conspicuous by their absence, revealing the weakness of their position and their inability to control the situation.
4. 546. On this aspect of the case, the Committee takes note of the detailed information contained in the legal report of the CDT, from which it emerges that the four arrested national trade union leaders who had been summoned to the prefecture of Casablanca on the day the strike began, Saturday 20 June 1981, had arrived there starting from 11.30 a.m. and had been arrested there. According to the CDT, Noubir Amaoui had been arrested at 11.30 a.m. and the others in the afternoon. Again, according to the CDT, the events in Casablanca had taken an alarming turn starting from the beginning of the afternoon of Saturday 20 June and continued on 21 and 22 June, repression being stepped up on the last two days. The Committee notes, in addition, that, according to the information sent by the CDT, the court of first instance effectively declared itself incompetent and that the persons concerned are now being prosecuted, by decision of the Criminal Chamber of the Court of Appeal, by a criminal court, and that they face sentences of 5 to 20 years imprisonment.
5. 547. In the absence of the observations requested from the Government on the situation of the arrested trade unionists mentioned by the complainants, the Committee can only note that the four national leaders of the CDT have been in custody awaiting trial for over a year (since June 1981) for having called for a strike.
6. 548. The Committee reiterates the conclusions which it reached in its 214th Report in which it stated that an examination of the documents supplied by the complainants, in particular the list of demands of the CDT and the letter which that organisation addressed to the Prime Minister on 11 June 1981 clearly showed that the demands related to wage increases, job security and the protection of trade union rights, all of which are questions that come within the normal province of trade union organisations. It was on the basis of these demands, concluded the Committee, that the general strike of 20 June had been organised by the CDT.
7. 549. Recalling that the preventive detention of trade unionists involves a serious danger of interference with freedom of association, the Committee again requests the Government to supply detailed information on the present situation of all the imprisoned trade unionists.
8. 550. As regards the alleged closure of the CDT premises, the Committee notes that the Government states that this was not done. In view of the contradictory information on this aspect of the case, the Committee can only insist on the importance which it attaches to the inviolability of trade union premises in general and to express the firm hope that the CDT may now exercise its trade union activities without hindrance throughout the country.
9. 551. As regards the dismissals which followed the strike that took place in June 1981 in various sectors, in particular in the postal sector, mining undertakings and in the ministry of the Interior, the Committee notes that, according to the Government, certain persons were dismissed for unjustified absence from work, or for striking without warning or for interfering with the continuity of public services. The Committee, recalling in general the importance which it attaches to the right to strike as one of the essential means available to workers and their organisations for promoting and defending their occupational interests, would invite the Government to re-examine the situation of workers dismissed for striking with a view to restoring a better climate of industrial relations.
10. 552. As regards the new allegations, namely the prohibition imposed on the CDT to celebrate may Day in 1982 and the sentencing of a CDT leader, Mr. Bouzabaa, to one year's imprisonment for holding a press conference on the trade union situation, the Committee notes that the Government only supplies its observations on the conviction of the trade union leader concerned. The Government admits that this person was convicted for distributing a press release during a meeting organised without previous authorisation, thereby infringing the "Law on Public Freedoms".
11. 553. As regards this aspect of the case, the Committee would insist that the right to express opinions through the press or other means is one of the essential elements of trade union rights, the full exercise of trade union rights requiring free circulation of information, opinions and ideas. The Committee, accordingly, expresses the firm hope that the Government will adopt an attitude of clemency towards this trade union leader who was convicted for distributing a press release during a meeting organised without previous authorisation. It requests the Government to keep it informed of any measures taken in this connection.
12. 554. Finally, the Committee requests the Government to communicate information on the allegation to which it has not replied, that is the prohibition imposed on the CDT to celebrate May Day 1982.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 555. The Committee recommends the Governing Body to approve the present interim report and the following conclusions in particular:
   • (a) In view of the time which has elapsed since the first proposal of direct contacts addressed to the Government (August 1981), the Committee deeply deplores the failure of the Government to agree to an on.-the-spot mission by a representative of the Director-General to examine the questions at issue. The Committee is convinced that such a mission could contribute to a better knowledge of the trade union situation and to a useful examination of possible solutions to the problems at issue. The Committee recommends the Governing Body to request the Director-General to approach the government authorities once again in order that such a mission may take place in the near future.
   • (b) As regards the allegations concerning the death of numerous persons during demonstrations, the Committee deplores that the Government has not supplied the additional observations which had been requested on this aspect of the case, it would again urge the Government to state whether a judicial inquiry has been held on the circumstances of these deaths, and if so, to inform it of the outcome of this inquiry.
   • (c) As regards the arrest of the trade unionists mentioned by the complainants and, in particular, the four national leaders of the CDT who have been in custody awaiting trial for over a year for having called for a strike, and who, according to the complaints, face sentences of 5 to 20 years imprisonment, the Committee again requests the Government to supply detailed information on their present situation and on the situation of all the detainees mentioned in the Annex to the 214th Report of the Committee.
   • (d) As regards the allegations concerning the dismissal of trade unionists following the strike of June 1981, the Committee invites the Government to re-examine the situation of workers dismissed for striking with a view to restoring a better climate of industrial relations.
   • (e) As regards the alleged closure of trade union premises of the CDT, the Committee, noting the assurances given by the Government that the authorities have not closed trade union premises, expresses the firm hope that the CDT will now be able to continue to carry out its activities without hindrance throughout the country.
   • (f) As regards the sentence of one year's imprisonment imposed on the national leader of the CDT, Mr. Bouzabaa, for distributing a press release during a meeting organised without previous authorisation, thereby, according to the Government, infringing the "Law on Public Freedoms", the Committee insists on the importance of the right to express opinions through the press as an essential means of exercising trade union rights. Accordingly, the Committee expresses the firm hope that the Government will adopt an attitude of clemency with regard to this trade union leader; it requests the Government to keep it informed of any measures taken in this respect.
   • (g) Finally, the Committee requests the Government to communicate its observations on the allegation, to which it has not replied, concerning the prohibition imposed on the CDT to celebrate May Day 1982.