Report in which the committee requests to be kept informed of development - Report No 248, March 1987

Case No 1346 (India) - Complaint date: 29-AUG-85 - Closed

1. 311. The Committee examined this case at its February and November 1986 meetings when it reached interim conclusions, approved by the Governing Body at its 232nd and 234th Sessions (February-March and November 1986) (see 243rd Report, paras. 588 to 600 and 246th Report, paras. 409 to 422). The Government sent a communication dated 12 February 1987 in connection with this case.
2. 312. India 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. Previous examination of the case

1. 313. At its meeting in November 1986, the Committee continued its examination of certain allegations of anti-union discrimination, in particular, concerning progress in appeals against 33 dismissals and physical attacks on leaders of the complainant union, in the Raptakos, Brett and Co. Ltd. undertaking since 1983. It also considered the Government's reply.
2. 314. The Governing Body, on the Committee's recommendation, approved the interim report on this case and, in particular, the following conclusions:
   • a) The Committee notes the Government's assurance that the cases of all 33 medical representatives who were dismissed from the Raptakos, Brett and Co. Ltd. undertaking allegedly because of their trade union activities are still being heard before the Bombay Labour Court; it requests the Government to inform it of the outcome of these cases and to send it a copy of the Court's decision as soon as it is handed down.
   • b) The Committee notes that the Government has not yet provided a specific reply to the complainant's most recent communication giving details of alleged management-backed physical violence against its officers and members; it urges the Government to send its observations on this aspect of the case in time for the Committee's next meeting.

B. The Government's reply

1. 315. In its communication of 12 February 1987, the Government states that the cases of the 33 dismissed medical representatives continues to be before the Bombay Labour Court for adjudication and the matter remains sub judice.
2. 316. It adds that reports have now been received from the State Governments of Bihar and West Bengal as regards the complainant's allegations of physical attacks on members of the Federation of Medical and Sales Representatives' Association of India. According to the State Government of Bihar, in the event of physical attack the complainant union could have lodged a report with the police or magistrate but it is not clear from the complaint whether this was done. In the absence of such a complaint being lodged, action on the part of the State Government was not possible. That State Government confirmed that, in relation to the alleged harassment of union members by accusations of Communist Party affiliation, it has instituted a case under section 107 of the Indian Criminal Procedure Code, which is a judicial proceeding, and that the aggrieved party has the option to move a higher court for any redress.
3. 317. As regards the alleged July 1984 kidnapping and beating of FMRAI members at Calcutta, the State Government of West Bengal has reported that the police looked into the matter but no charge sheet could be submitted to the court due to lack of adequate evidence.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 318. The Committee notes with some concern that the dispute involving the 33 dismissals, referred for adjudication to the Bombay Labour Court in December 1985, has still not been heard, thus leaving the 33 workers concerned dismissed apparently since the events of late 1983 for reasons - according to the complainant - connected with their union membership. The Committee would emphasise, as it has done in other cases involving long periods of delay in the hearing of court cases involving freedom of association issues (see, for example, 235th Report, Cases Nos. 997, 999 and 1029 (Turkey), para. 35), that trade unionists should, like other persons, be subject to normal judicial procedure and have the right to have their cases heard without undue delay. Moreover, it draws the Government's attention to the principle, as it has done in an earlier examination of the present case, that workers should enjoy adequate protection against all acts of anti-union discrimination in respect of their employment, such as dismissal.
2. 319. As regards the alleged physical attacks on members of the complainant union in the State of Bihar, the Committee appreciates the difficulties which might arise for a government in obtaining information in the absence of specific complaints lodged by the union with the police or the courts. It would, however, point out to the Government that given the detailed information supplied by the complainant on the incidents alleged in the present case (reproduced in paras. 414 to 417 of the Committee's 246th Report), other avenues for investigation and, if necessary, corrective action, were available. It is not clear, for example, whether the management of the company involved was contacted for its comments. The Committee has also stressed that, when disorders have occurred involving loss of human life or serious injury, the setting up of an independant judicial inquiry by the government concerned is a particularly appropriate method of fully ascertaining the facts, determining responsibilities, punishing those responsible and preventing the repetition of such actions (see, for example, 236th Report, Cases Nos. 1277 and 1288 (Colombia), para. 681). In any case, the Committee would recall generally that trade union rights can only be exercised in a climate that is free from violence, pressure or threats of any kind against trade unionists; governments, for their part, should take the appropriate steps to ensure that this principle is respected (see 234th Report, Case No. 1237 (Brazil), para. 213).
3. 320. Since, according to the information available, a police investigation revealed no evidence in the matter of the alleged kidnapping and beating of FMRAI members in Calcutta, the Committee considers that this aspect of the case does not call for further examination.
4. 321. The Committee observes that the case currently pending under s.107 of the Indian Criminal Procedure Code involves political affiliation, a matter which is not within its competence to examine.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 322. In the light of its foregoing conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:
   • a) The Committee draws the Government's attention to the importance of the speedy handling of the cases involving 33 workers dismissed in 1983 which were lodged with the Bombay Labour Court in 1985 and requests it to inform the Committee of the outcome of these appeals, with a copy of the Court's judgement.
   • b) It draws the Government's attention to the principle concerning the necessity for a climate that is free from violence for the exercise of trade union rights.