Interim Report - Report No 279, November 1991

Case No 1572 (Philippines) - Complaint date: 23-JAN-91 - Closed

1. 563. The Kilusang Mayo Uno (KMU) presented allegations of violations of trade union rights against the Government of the Philippines in a communication dated 23 January 1991. The Government supplied its observations in a letter dated 12 August 1991.
2. 564. The Philippines have ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. The complainant's allegations

1. 565. The complainant, in its letter of 23 January 1991, alleges that the Philippines Government has threatened to illegalise or "ban" it, a threat followed by arbitrary arrests, harassment and killings of its leaders and members following incidents during a four-day general strike affecting 744 firms nationwide which commenced on 24 October 1990.
2. 566. The KMU describes the background to the strike as follows. Labour unions which had some years ago joined together as the Labour Advisory and Consultative Council (LACC) were demanding the rollback of oil prices (increased following a promise to the International Monetary Fund to bridge the gap in budget deficits through oil taxes), a general daily wage increase of US$1.40 and a US$35.70 increase for public employees. When the Government refused to discuss wage adjustments as being contrary to its policy of attracting foreign investors, the LACC reduced its demand for a general daily wage increase to US$0.89. The Government, however, still refused to engage in dialogue and the strike was announced as a last resort. The KMU claims that the strike had wide support from labour groups, people's organisations, senators and congressmen and non-unionised workers who showed their sympathy by not reporting to work. The industrial action throughout the country involved a transport stoppage, marches, rallies, camp-outs (such as by government employees in Cebu City) and, sadly, the killing of a trade union leader in Bataan, arbitrary arrests of protesting workers and the forcible military dispersal of strikers. According to the KMU, the Government exploited one violent incident when 16 (a figure later raised to 23) passenger buses were burned by unidentified men, in an effort to discredit the strike movement and particularly the KMU's role in it. Although the KMU did not approve of such violence and stated that bus-burning was not part of the protest action, government and military spokespersons have used publicity to blame the strike organisers for "fomenting violence" and to spread rumours of communist involvement in the strike.
3. 567. The KMU alleges that the authorities used this psychological conditioning to justify its subsequent crackdown on militant labour unions. It points out that since early 1988 various senior military personnel had described the KMU as an "illegal association", but that following the October strike, the anti-KMU policy took the form of military assault on KMU member federations. For example, in Negros province attempts were made to outlaw the National Federation of Sugar Workers for its alleged links with the underground movement. The KMU fears that such a public attitude has led to more violence by armed anti-communist vigilante groups and Civilian Armed Forces Geographical Units (CAFGUs). Another tactic used by the Government to isolate the KMU has been to deny it participation in any dialogue between the President and labour groups and to sully the reputation of its leaders by the filing of numerous law suits against them, ranging from fraud and slander to arson and incitement to sedition. This latter harassment has extended to what the KMU describes as "a comedy of evidence build-up"; this involved in one instance the arrest of a number of so-called KMU members who were charged with the murder of a policeman and an attempted bombing of the Quezon City Hall, because they were carrying KMU leaflets and flags when apprehended.
4. 568. The non-registration of the KMU with the Department of Labour and Employment is also used as a pretext to justify assaults on KMU members. Yet the KMU stresses that registration is not compulsory in the Philippines so that its non-registered status does not prevent it from effectively serving its members' interests. In any case it points out that all its affiliated organisations are registered. In parenthesis, the KMU notes that the issue of its non-registration was only raised in the recent history of its existence, when the labour centre started to become critical of the Government's policies
5. 569. A further anti-union measure, using the Gulf crisis as an excuse, was threatened in the press on 7 January 1991 when the new military chief of staff called for President Aquino to be given emergency powers to ban strikes. The LACC immediately denounced any such move as a gross violation of workers' rights and parliamentarians and other people's organisations joined that protest. Although the President publicly rejected the idea, a press leak revealed that the Aquino administration would "effect a strike/lockout moratorium ... where a shooting war in the Middle East erupts". The KMU alleges that draft legislation to cope with such an emergency had in fact been prepared, empowering the President, inter alia, to take over privately-owned public utilities, to suspend labour laws impeding production and distribution of food and other essential items, to stagger work hours in both the public and private sectors, to oblige the media to give "preferential time" to presidential messages and to undertake any "other measures". Although that draft was not used, the KMU remained wary, especially since military forces in Metro Manila had been recently increased and the military co-ordinated with local government officials to put in place a citizen-identification system. A 1 a.m. to 5 a.m. curfew was even introduced for a short time (from 18 to 22 January) in some Metro Manila municipalities.
6. 570. The complainant also alleges that arrests without warrant - upheld by the Supreme Court on 9 July 1990 - stirred apprehensions among labour groups. These fears were proven during the October 1990 strike and the protest strikes of 16 November and 10 to 15 December 1990. KMU Chairperson, Mr. Crispin Beltran, was tricked by a Western District Police colonel to join him in the police station for questioning after both had attended a TV show on 30 October, but charges were filed against him for incitement to sedition and illegal assembly following his speech to rallyists on 24 October explaining the workers' strike. Other charges dropped against Mr. Beltran many years ago (fraud, slander, illegal association) were revived in an effort to silence him permanently behind bars. He was released on bail and able to file counter-affidavits in his defence, but was immediately charged again, this time with arson in connection with the bus-burning incident. The LACC condemned this arrest as did workers' organisations from several other countries. According to the KMU 67 warrantless arrests were made during the first day of the strike. Regarding the 16 November protest march, the KMU states that the Public Assembly Act of 1985 (which requires the application for a written permit for public assemblies in public places) represses the citizens' right to peaceful assembly and justified the Government's use of water cannons, beatings, gassing and arrests of workers in Metro Manila and Southern Tagalog. Violence and union-busting allegedly also took place on the same day when members of the Genuine Labour Organisation of Workers in Hotel, Restaurant and Allied Industries (GLOWHRAIN-KMU) at the Silahis International Hotel took strike action against the dismissal of 180 union members. After a further oil price increase in early December, workers demonstrated on the streets and were violently dispersed because of the no-permit/no-rally policy. The KMU explains that when it formally applied for a rally permit last November, Manila City Hall refused it citing "the violent nation-wide strike and protest action last 24 October and 16 November" and claiming that the rally would be infiltrated by Communists. The KMU stresses that such a claim has never been proven in its rallies. The KMU filed a complaint with the Philippines Commission on Human Rights against the dispersal of the rallies, in which the Commission declared that the policy violated the constitutional right of Filipinos to assemble peacefully.
7. 571. Lastly, the complainant lists the following 11 cases of murder of its officials and members:
   • - Ferdinand Pelaro, Reynaldo de la Fuente and Aguinaldo Marfil were shot dead by CAFGU members on 22 November 1990 in Hacienda Azcuna, Barangay Minnoyan, Murcia, Negros Occidental; the incident was witnessed by Ms. Ruby Sioco, an organiser of the Women Workers Movement, who identified the killer as Kuring Nunilon de la Torre;
   • - Rey Olano, treasurer of the Associated Democratic Labour Union (ADLO-KMU) and spokesperson of the negotiating team which marched around Mariveles town in Bataan, was killed by two unidentified men on 29 October 1990 at Lakandula Street, Mariveles; some witnesses claim that the killer hid inside the Philippines Constabulary detachment building afterwards;
   • - Perlito "Boy" Lisondra, an organiser for Transport Mindanao for Solidarity, Independence and Nationalism/TRANSMISSION-KMU who had already received threats from vigilante groups, Apolonio Alecanio and Ike Hernandez were killed separately on 17 and 18 December 1990 in Davao after the people's strike against the increase in oil prices;
   • - Roger Magbujos, president of KMU local union of Bavaria Woodcraft Exports Inc. at Laguna, Southern Tagalog, was killed on 14 September 1990 after signing a new collective agreement;
   • - Oscar Lazaro, president of Pasang Masda, a jeepny drivers' organisation, was shot dead by young-looking unidentified men on 22 October 1990 in Metro Manila; on 18 January 1991 a newspaper reported that the police had caught one of his suspected killers, a former military man who admits to being a member of the Guardian military association;
   • - Lino Arog, union president at STANFILCO banana plantation was shot by unidentified gunmen on 24 December 1990 at the General Santos Plantation, Cotabato City, Mindanao;
   • - Ronelo Gionolos, activist of a National Federation of Labour-KMU affiliate, was shot dead by Oroy Diego, a CAFGU member, on 23 December 1990 and two other union leaders (Mcreynold Ginolos and Bong Frias) were seriously wounded in the attack.
     • The complainant lists certain other killings and events that have already been examined by the Committee in the context of other cases against the Government of the Philippines.
   • 572. In conclusion, the KMU asks that the ILO urge the Aquino Government to end the climate of anti-union violence, to lift its threat to illegalise the KMU, to scrap its warrantless arrest policy, to dismantle the vigilante groups and CAFGUs and that it apply appropriate sanctions to oblige the authorities to comply with ILO freedom of association Conventions and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

B. The Government's reply

1. 573. In its letter of 12 August 1991, the Government observes that this case was filed as a result of opinions expressed by some government and military officials calling for the banning of the KMU after it had committed certain condemnable acts of violence during its "Welga ng Bayan" (National Protest). These were, however, merely personal opinions and not officially sanctioned. No ban was ever imposed against the KMU, nor were its members arrested for mere membership of that organisation. Some KMU officials were invited by the police to shed light on the violent acts committed during the course of the nationwide strike, while some were charged with sedition for their seditious acts and utterances.
2. 574. The Government notes that the complaint also mentions high oil prices, low salaries and the Government's insistence on repaying its loans with the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, concerning which it adds that the President announced on 19 July 1991 a reduction in oil prices, and on 8 January an increase in the minimum wage (following a November 1990 wage increase). Regarding the KMU's emphasis on the support of its strike by the people, the Government welcomes people's participation in governance, which has always been part of the present administration's policies and is enshrined in the Constitution. The Government cannot understand, however, the KMU's insistence that there were crackdowns on militant labour groups, "as if militancy is the monopoly of the KMU". It states that militancy is inherent in the labour movement, and yet it is only the KMU which seems to suffer from paranoia against the Government. Despite the KMU's claims of a government witch-hunt against it, the Government states that no leader or member of the KMU has been arrested or charged with the offence of being a member or officer of that organisation. Its registration is neither required nor withheld by the authorities, and it is free to do anything within the parameters of legality.
3. 575. On the issue of the threatened strike ban, the Government points out that, since the presentation of this complaint in January 1991, no such ban was ever implemented. In fact, it points out that another nationwide strike took place in the period between the filing of the complaint and the writing of the Government's reply. The KMU's apprehensions are thus clearly without basis: the bill granting extra powers to the President, the curfews, the identification system also were never implemented, except for the curfew which an overzealous local official imposed for two nights in his locality and failed to enforce anyway. The Government denies the complainant's allegation of a total war policy against it evidenced by specific incidents of trade union violence and states that it has never adopted a policy of psychological operations, restrictive labour laws or militarisation.
4. 576. On the contrary, the cornerstone of government policy has been improving the quality of life and protecting basic rights and freedoms, and the Constitution itself is replete with provisions on social, human and political rights. According to the Government, if the KMU sees all the Government's measures - such as progressive increase in the minimum wage and amendment of labour laws in consultation with the workers' and employers' organisations - as a total war policy, it can only allow the KMU its own point of view.
5. 577. Regarding the specific allegations of anti-union violence, the Government states that concerned agencies will be investigating them and that legal processes are available for those who wish to file the appropriate complaints. The Government states that the Committee may well find these processes insufficient, but under present economic limitations the "administration of justice, in whatever state it is, is the one we have at the moment".

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 578. The Committee notes that this case arises from threats made by the authorities following a four-day nationwide strike starting on 24 October 1990 and also concerns a series of specifically described allegedly anti-union acts, including the warrantless arrest of the KMU Chairperson and 67 other persons during a strike, a threatened suspension of strikes, legislative restrictions on public meetings and the murder of 11 named officials and members of the complainant union.
2. 579. The Committee notes that the KMU believes that the authorities have singled it out for harassment and isolation using the press in a psychological campaign against it. The Government, however, forcefully denies any such intention. The Committee appreciates the Government's observation that the threats (of being declared illegal, of a ban on strikes) feared by the KMU did not materialise, but would point out that this is the fourth complaint lodged by the KMU labour federation against the Government of the Philippines since the assumption of office of President Aquino and that most of the allegations in the various complaints have been upheld (see Case No. 1353, concluded in the Committee's 246th Report, November 1986; current Case No. 1444, examined most recently in the Committee's 277th Report, February-March 1991 and elsewhere in the present report; and Case No. 1529, also examined and closed in the 277th Report. See also Case No. 1426, presented by the International Union of Food and Allied Workers' Associations (IUF) which concerned affiliated members also belonging to the KMU and which was closed in the 278th Report, May-June 1991).
3. 580. Turning to the specific allegations in the present case, the Committee notes the Government's reply that the threat to "ban" the KMU was merely a personal opinion expressed by some government and military officials and was not officially sanctioned. While noting that the threat was never carried out, the Committee would nevertheless observe that such pronouncements cannot but fuel situations of uncertainty and fear, particularly when widely diffused by the press. This Committee has stated on several occasions (Digest of principles and decisions of the Freedom of Association Committee, 3rd edition, 1985, para. 70) 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 and it is for governments to ensure that this principle is respected. It trusts that appropriate steps have been taken so that high-ranking members of the Government and the military avoid making public statements that challenge the principles of freedom of association.
4. 581. The Committee also notes that the draft legislation empowering the President, inter alia, to restrict industrial action was not presented to Parliament and recalls in this connection that strike action is one of the essential means through which workers and their organisations may promote and defend their economic and social interests (Digest, para. 363). If governments argue that a restriction on this right is needed in times of emergency, the Committee is of the view that measures suspending the right to strike should be limited in time and scope to the period of emergency (Digest, para. 391).
5. 582. Regarding the specific incidents of anti-union harassment by the authorities against KMU leaders and members, the Committee notes with concern the arrest without warrant of KMU Chairperson, Mr. Crispin Beltran, on 30 October 1990 who was later charged with incitement to sedition, illegal assembly, arson and certain other offences which had been dropped many years before. The Committee already examined a challenge to arrests without warrants in its 277th Report in the context of Case No. 1444 (see paras. 313 and 332, approved by the Governing Body in February-March 1991), during which it noted that the Philippines Supreme Court had upheld the practice in that it was restricted to cases of subversion. However, the Committee recalled the importance attached to trade unionism being exercised in a climate free from insecurity and fear, where certain basic guarantees of due process should always be respected in the case of detained unionists. Moreover, the Committee is of the opinion that if a government has sufficient grounds for believing that persons arrested have been involved in subversive activity, those persons should be rapidly tried before the courts with all the safeguards of a normal judicial procedure (Digest, para. 114). In the present case it notes that Mr. Beltran has been released on bail and has been able to file counter-petitions in his defence. It requests the Government to inform it of progress in the proceedings against this trade union leader concerning whom its reply - to the effect that the concerned agencies will be investigating the matters - is disturbingly brief.
6. 583. As regards the alleged restriction on peaceful public assembly by virtue of the Public Assembly Act, 1985, the Committee notes the KMU's description of police and military breakups of rallies on 16 November and in early December 1990, as well as the authorities' refusal to grant the KMU's request to hold a public rally in November 1990. It also notes that the Philippines Commission on Human Rights has, in examining a KMU complaint to that body, stated that the "no-permit/no-rally" policy violates the Philippines constitutional right to assemble peacefully. This Committee would point out that, although the right to hold trade union meetings is an essential aspect of trade union rights, the organisations concerned must observe the general provisions relating to public meetings which are applicable to all; this principle is contained in Article 8 of Convention No. 87 which provides that workers and their organisations, like other persons or organised collectivities, shall respect the law of the land (Digest, para. 158). However, the Committee has also recognised that permission to hold public meetings and demonstrations - which is an important trade union right - should not be arbitrarily refused (Digest, para. 157). Not having been supplied with a copy of the Public Assembly Act, the Committee asks the Government to send the text of the Act so that it can evaluate whether the requirements therein are reasonable limits applicable to all. It notes, in the meantime, from the refusal of the Manila City Hall reported by the complainant, that the ground for refusal given in that particular case appeared to be a wish to avoid violent disturbances such as had recently occurred at mass public rallies. In one past case the Committee had observed that trade unions must conform to the general provisions applicable to all public meetings and must respect the reasonable limits which may be fixed by the authorities to avoid disturbances in public places (Digest, para. 159); it therefore considers on the basis of the information before it that this aspect of the case does not call for further examination.
7. 584. Lastly, regarding the deaths of 11 named KMU officials and members, the Committee regrets that the Government merely states that the concerned agencies will be investigating these incidents and that complaint procedures exist at the national level for redress. It recalls that this type of allegation is extremely common in complaints against the Government of the Philippines, but should be investigated diligently by the national authorities given the fact that deaths are involved, often allegedly at the hands of armed groups which the present Government has vowed to disband and control. The Committee notes, moreover, that in certain shootings listed in the present case, eye-witnesses have been able to give the names of suspects. It accordingly asks the Government to supply as a matter of urgency specific information on any police, judicial or Philippines Commission on Human Rights inquiries into the murders of the following unionists, the details of which appear in the allegations of the complainant: Ferdinand Pelaro, Reynaldo de la Fuente and Aguinaldo Marfil; Rey Olano, treasurer of the Associated Democratic Labour Union (ADLO-KMU); Perlito "Boy" Lisondra, an organiser for Transport Mindanao for Solidarity, Independence and Nationalism/TRANSMISSION- KMU, Apolonio Alecanio and Ike Hernandez; Roger Magbujos, president of KMU local union of Bavaria Woodcraft Exports Inc. at Laguna, Southern Tagalog; Oscar Lazaro, president of Pasang Masda, a jeepney drivers' organisation; Lino Arog, union president at STANFILCO banana plantation; Ronelo Gionolos, activist of a National Federation of Labour-KMU affiliate.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 585. In the light of its foregoing interim conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:
   • (a) Noting 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 and that it is for governments to ensure that this principle is respected, the Committee trusts that appropriate steps have been taken so that high-ranking members of the Government and the military avoid making public statements that challenge the principles of freedom of association.
   • (b) The Committee recalls that strike action is one of the essential means through which workers and their organisations may promote and defend their economic and social interests and if governments argue that a restriction on this right is needed in times of emergency, the Committee is of the view that measures suspending the right to strike should be limited in time and scope to the period of emergency.
   • (c) Noting with concern that KMU Chairperson, Mr. Crispin Beltran, was arrested on 30 October 1990 without a warrant, then charged with many offences including sedition and is presently released on bail, it requests the Government to inform it of progress in the proceedings against this trade union leader.
   • (d) The Committee considers that the allegation concerning restrictions on peaceful public assembly by virtue of the Public Assembly Act, 1985, does not call for further examination.
   • (e) The Committee asks the Government to supply as a matter of urgency specific information on any police, judicial or Philippines Commission on Human Rights inquiries into the murders of the following 11 unionists: Ferdinand Pelaro, Reynaldo de la Fuente and Aguinaldo Marfil; Rey Olano; Perlito "Boy" Lisondra, Apolonio Alecanio and Ike Hernandez; Roger Magbujos; Oscar Lazaro; Lino Arog; and Ronelo Gionolos.