Interim Report - Report No 318, November 1999

Case No 1922 (Djibouti) - Complaint date: 04-APR-97 - Closed

Allegations: Dismissals, suspensions and removal of trade unionists following strike action; confiscation of trade union archives; obstruction of May Day demonstrations and interference in a trade union general meeting

• Allegations: Dismissals, suspensions and removal of trade unionists following strike action; confiscation of trade union archives; obstruction of May Day demonstrations and interference in a trade union general meeting
  188. 188 The Committee has already examined Cases Nos. 1851 and 1922 on several occasions, most recently at its November 1998 meeting when it submitted an interim report to the Governing Body (see 311th Report, paras. 462-478, approved by the Governing Body at its 273rd Session in November 1998).
  189. 189 Since the last examination of the case, the Inter-Trade Union Association of Labour/General Union of Djibouti Workers (UDT/UGTD) sent additional information and new allegations on 20 February, 5 May and 4 August 1999.
  190. 190 With regard to Case No. 2042, the ICFTU sent a communication to the Director-General of the ILO on 20 July 1999, and the OATUU presented a new complaint of violation of freedom of association in a communication dated 26 July 1999.
  191. 191 The Government sent certain observations in a communication dated 10 August 1999.
  192. 192 Djibouti has 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. Previous examination of Cases Nos. 1851 and 1922

1. 193. At its meeting in November 1998, in the light of the Committee's interim conclusions, the Governing Body approved the following recommendations:
   • ... the Committee, noting with deep concern that, despite the promises made by the Government to the direct contacts mission, no tangible progress has been made towards the full restoration of freedom of association, ...
     • (a) The Committee strongly urges the Government to restore freedom of association in full, and in particular to urgently take the following measures:
       • -- return the UDT trade union archives confiscated on 16 July 1997;
       • -- reinstate in their posts and functions all the trade union leaders and members who were dismissed or suspended, if they so request, especially the senior union leaders of the UDT/UGTD who were dismissed more than three years ago;
       • -- investigate the complaints lodged by Mr. Aref and all the trade unionists concerned;
       • -- undertake consultations with the social partners on the revision of the Labour Code;
       • -- ensure that workers in future can hold public meetings on May Day, given that such meetings constitute an important aspect of trade union rights.
     • (b) The Committee urges the Government to provide detailed information as a matter of urgency on any concrete measures that it takes to implement the above recommendations (see 311th Report, para. 479).

B. New allegations

1. 194. In an initial communication of 20 February 1999, the UDT/UGTD expresses regret that the Government has ignored the Committee's recommendations regarding Cases Nos. 1851 and 1922, and criticizes the Government for putting pressure on dozens of trade unionists, forcing them and their families to leave the country.
2. 195. In a subsequent communication dated 5 May 1999, the UDT/UGTD claims that workers were forbidden to take part in May Day festivities and that this ban was enforced by units of the national police force. The UDT/UGTD also claims that the Minister of Labour and his colleagues responsible for transport and public works declared that they wanted to break up the UDT/UGTD and bring in new union leaders. The Government allegedly prevented the two central organizations from holding their ordinary general meetings, for several months in one case and for more than a year in the other.

C. Case No. 2042

1. 196. In a communication dated 20 July 1999, the ICFTU records its concern at the fact that the Minister of Employment and National Solidarity on 15 July 1999 unilaterally convened an extraordinary general meeting of the UDT/UGTD. The ICFTU has also supplied with its communication a letter dated 18 July 1999 from the General Secretary of the UDT, a complainant in the case, recalling that the UDT and the UGTD are two mutually independent associations of trade unions and that all the trade unions affiliated to them refused to participate in the proposed extraordinary general meeting. At the end of June 1999, anonymous leaflets calling for a joint general meeting are said to have been distributed, although the UDT had been announcing officially from April 1999 onwards that its ordinary general meeting would be held from 24 to 26 August 1999. The meeting had already been postponed once as a precautionary measure, given the manifestly hostile attitude of the public authorities.
2. 197. However, the Minister of Employment and National Solidarity convened an extraordinary general meeting of the two central organizations on 15 July 1999 with a view to appointing a president and a general secretary of the UDT and of the UGTD, having first issued a list of approved participants. The meeting lasted two hours. None of the trade unions affiliated to the two central organizations actually took part. Only three or four unions participated, not 17 or 20 as the Government claimed; these were unions which had been created for the occasion by the Government and had no connection with the central organizations, whose names and functions they were intending to usurp. The OATUU in its communication of 26 July 1999 presents a complaint of interference by the Government by unilaterally convening the extraordinary general meeting.
3. 198. Lastly, the UDT/UGTD indicates that the Government has cancelled the post box leases of the two central organizations and given orders that their mail should not be delivered to them but forwarded instead to the sham committee of the UDT/UGTD which was appointed by the authorities.

D. The Government's reply

1. 199. In its communication of 10 August 1999, the Government states that, as regards the invitation to trade union members to attend the general meeting of 15 June 1999, the Minister of Employment and National Solidarity, one month after his appointment, received, on 19 June 1999, a delegation from the unions affiliated to the UDT/UGTD. The delegation stated that the representatives of 20 unions affiliated to the UDT/UGTD which met on 15 June 1999 at the premises of the Djibouti railway workers wanted to hold an extraordinary general meeting on 15 July. The Government has supplied a list of signatories to this request. It adds that the delegation requested the Government's help in organizing the general meeting, and has provided a copy of a letter dated 29 June 1999 requesting leave of absence from work for workers wishing to participate in the meeting. According to the Government, the Minister's intervention was limited to obtaining the use of a conference room in the "Palais du peuple" and a notice to employers to authorize leave to participants, the list of whom had been deposited by the two central organizations.
2. 200. With regard to the status of the former union leaders, the Government explains that these four elected union officials cut themselves off from the grass-roots unions, engaged in systematic obstruction and, contrary to their own statutes, failed to organize triennial elections to their organizations' executive bodies. The last general meetings of the UGTD and the UDT date respectively from 10 March 1994 and 25 April 1995. The former elected officials ignored calls from union members and the public authorities to hold another general meeting.
3. 201. As regards the organization of the extraordinary general meeting, the Government points out that the statutes of the UGTD (section 25) and of the UDT (section 20) provide for the possibility of convening an extraordinary general meeting by a decision of 50 per cent or two-thirds of members of the unions affiliated to these two organizations. The Government adds that 18 of these unions each returned an elected official to serve on the new executive bodies of the two central organizations. On 14 July 1999, according to the Government, once the four members of the old executive committees learned of the forthcoming extraordinary general meeting, they hastily deposited a letter dated 7 July 1999 informing the public authorities of a general meeting to be held from 24 to 26 August 1999 and referring to a letter dated 12 June which was never received.
4. 202. The Government assures the ILO of its full cooperation with the trade unions. It offered to act as mediator in the dispute between the four elected union officials and their employers, and recalls that the four former union members who were dismissed committed serious offences against trade union legislation by abandoning their posts and physically assaulting colleagues. Nevertheless, when the Government agreed to intercede with the employers on condition that the four individuals concerned acknowledged their wrongdoing, a step which the Government claims was recommended by the direct contacts mission, the workers refused to consider the proposal. The Government also emphasizes that the Minister of Labour made every effort to involve the central organizations in the revision of the Labour Code, to organize training seminars on employment legislation for trade unionists and to obtain conference rooms and leave of absence for elected union officials in order to ensure that they could exercise their rights.

E. The Committee's conclusions

1. 203. The Committee recalls that Cases Nos. 1851 and 1922 gave rise to a direct contacts mission in January 1998 and that a number of positive developments were identified on that occasion. However, the Committee notes with concern that the trade union situation has seriously deteriorated since the mission was undertaken. It notes that, contrary to the previous recommendations to restore freedom of association in full, the Government has not stated whether or not it has restored the trade union archives confiscated from the UDT on 16 July 1997. On the other hand, the Government has indicated that, in order to bring about the reinstatement in their posts and functions of the leaders of the UDT/UGTD who were dismissed more than four years ago, it called on them to acknowledge their wrongdoing. Furthermore, according to the complainants, the Government cut the union leaders out of the consultations on the revision of labour legislation and prevented the two central organizations from holding ordinary general meetings, in one case for several months and in the other for more than a year. The Government is also said to have used force to prevent May Day celebrations from taking place, and to have convened unilaterally a trade union general meeting and drawn up the list of authorized participants with the aim, according to the complainants, of usurping their names and functions. Lastly, the Government is said to have ordered that mail deliveries to the former union leaders be stopped and that the mail be forwarded to the new leaders appointed by the authorities.
2. 204. With regard to the failure to reinstate in their posts and functions the leaders of the UDT/UGTD who were dismissed for starting a strike in September 1995 in protest against the Finance Act, the Committee recalls the legitimate nature of the protest strike of 1995 as a means of defending the economic and professional interests of the workers, and the commitments made by the Government to the direct contacts mission that it would seek the reinstatement of the workers concerned. The Committee recalls that, contrary to what the Government asserts, the recommendation of the direct contacts mission was the reinstatement of the dismissed workers without requiring them to give a declaration of loyalty. The Committee once again strongly urges the Government to ensure that the trade union leaders and members who were dismissed are reinstated in their posts and functions if they so request, and reiterates its previous recommendations concerning the importance which it attaches to the principle that declarations of loyalty or other similar commitments, such as the acknowledgement of wrongdoing demanded in the present case, should not be a precondition of reinstatement of the trade union leaders in question.
3. 205. As regards the matter of the extraordinary general meeting convened by the Government on 15 July 1999, the Committee has taken note of the list dated 15 June 1999 of union members who are said to have requested such a meeting and of the persons who actually attended the meeting. It notes that the lists do not include any of the outgoing union leaders. The Committee recalls that in cases of internal disputes between rival leaders within a trade union organization, it is important that supervision of elections should be carried out by independent judicial authorities in order to guarantee the impartiality and objectivity of the proceedings. This did not occur in the present case. Under these circumstances the Committee insists that the workers of Djibouti must be able to elect their trade union representatives freely and democratically. The Committee requests the Government to allow elections to be held in the different affiliated unions and general meetings to be held by the UDT and UGTD under the sole supervision of independent judicial bodies, and to keep it informed in this regard.
4. 206. As regards the ban on May Day celebrations in 1999, the Committee is particularly concerned by this new prohibition and once again requests the Government to ensure that in future workers can hold public meetings on May Day, given that such meetings constitute an important aspect of trade union rights.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 207. In the light of its foregoing interim conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:
   • a. The Committee once again strongly urges the Government to ensure that the trade union leaders and members who were dismissed, in particular the senior union leaders of the UDT/UGTD, are reinstated in their posts and functions if they so request, and reiterates its previous recommendations concerning the importance which it attaches to the principle that declarations of loyalty or other similar commitments, such as the acknowledgement of wrongdoing demanded in the present case, should not be imposed as a condition for reinstatement of the trade unionists in question.
   • b. The Committee insists that the workers of Djibouti must be able to elect their trade union representatives freely and democratically, and requests the Government to allow elections to be held in the different affiliated unions and general meetings to be held by the UDT and UGTD under the sole supervision of independent judicial bodies, and to keep it informed in this regard.
   • c. The Committee requests the Government to ensure that in future workers can hold public meetings on May Day, given that such meetings constitute an important aspect of trade union rights.