Interim Report - Report No 318, November 1999

Case No 1965 (Panama) - Complaint date: 19-MAY-98 - Closed

Allegations: Arrests and ill-treatment of trade unionists

1. 372. The complaint is contained in a communication dated 19 May 1998 from the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU). The Government sent its observations in communications dated 29 May and 17 November 1998 and 25 May 1999.
2. 373. Panama 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. The complainant's allegations

1. 374. In its communication of 19 May 1998, the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) alleges that 13 leaders or members of the Single National Union of Workers of the Construction Industry and Related Occupations (SUNTRACS) were arrested on 20 January 1998 during a peaceful demonstration (during a strike in the construction enterprise Aribesa in Los Lagos district, Colón Province) and detained for five days. The demonstration took place in the streets near the housing project which was being built by the company. The trade unionists in question were: Marcos Andrades of the union's national executive; Javier Méndez, union member; Julio E. Trejos, union representative; Juan C. Salas, union representative; Luis Avila, union representative; Alejandro De la Rosa, union member; Darío Melle, union member; Efraín Ballesteros, union representative; Martín Montaño, union member; Aníbal Alvarado, union member; Luis González, union representative; Tomas Mendoza, union representative; and Fernando Tlubet of the union's national executive. The ICFTU states that during their detention, the trade unionists endured inhuman conditions, with no water or sanitation, and that Mr. Luis González and others were assaulted and ill-treated by members of the national police. According to the complainant, the strike had been declared in protest at the company's failure to comply with certain conditions relating to the payment of social security contributions, provision of safety equipment, dismissals of workers, payment of the lighting clause, and payment of workers hired by subcontractors.
2. 375. The ICFTU adds that on 21 January 1998, following the protest demonstrations of 20 January, the premises of SUNTRACS in the city of Colón were raided by agents of the national police, who arrested 12 union members. The order for the arrests was issued by the Mayor of the city of Colón. Among those arrested were the following: Carlos Agrazal, representative; Nicolás Romero, union representative; Darío Ulate, union member; Saúl Méndez, the union's national defence secretary; Luis F. Araúz; Valentín Sanjur; Sixto Ferreira; Pormilio Beitía; Alberto Gálvez, a human rights activist; Juan Rosero; Sebastián Hernández; and Guillermo Ortega. The detainees were all taken on the same night of 21 January to the Third Night Tribunal and sentenced to five days' non-commutable detention.
3. 376. According to the secretary-general of SUNTRACS, the arrests were made on the grounds that the persons concerned had allegedly obstructed public roads, shown disrespect to authority and disturbed public order. On 27 January 1998, the union lodged a complaint with the National General Prosecutor alleging abuse of authority and action exceeding official powers by the Mayor of Colón, the night judge and the Cristóbal magistrate.

B. The Government's reply

1. 377. In its communications of 14 May, 17 November and 29 May 1998, the Government states that the conflict in the present complaint originated in the dismissals of five workers from the company Aribesa on 16 January 1998. On 17, 19 and 20 January, the workers stopped operations in Los Lagos whereupon the company decided to dismiss all the workers involved. On 20 January 1998, SUNTRACS presented a list of complaints against the company Aribesa alleging violations of signed accords and the collective labour agreement. The company replied on 27 of the same month, within the period required by law, and refuted all the complaints set out in the list. Talks on the list of complaints began on 30 January and the union, as a bargaining tactic, demanded the reinstatement of all the dismissed workers and an investigation into the cases of the five workers dismissed on 16 January. The company stated that it was prepared to discuss the matter. On 2 February the company's negotiators were not present at the conciliation talks. On the following day, the company requested that the talks be suspended until the next day, when it would give its reply concerning the reinstatement of the dismissed workers, compliance with the accords signed with the union on 6 January 1998, the 6 per cent payment, and payment of tool hire charges. On 4 February, the company undertook to comply with the agreements signed on 6 January 1998 and that this would be done between 6 and 9 February. However, it refused outright to discuss the reinstatement of the dismissed workers. On the same day, the union and the company resolved to declare the conciliation process terminated, although the period of 15 days specified in paragraph 1 of section 443 of the Labour Code was not due to elapse until 11 February. The union had 20 working days from 4 February onwards within which it could declare a strike. The negotiations took place in an uneasy atmosphere of mutual recriminations and no agreement was reached on the list of complaints. In short, the talks did not lead to any agreement regarding reinstatement of the dismissed workers, since in the company's view these dismissals were legally justified. The union finally issued a strike declaration for 17 February 1998. The authorities endeavoured throughout these proceedings to bring the parties to an agreement.
2. 378. The Government explains that in the early days of the dispute in mid-January 1998, during the protest demonstrations in the streets of Colón, members of SUNTRACS employed by the company committed acts of violence and destruction of private property and clashed with a group of workers led by the director, Marcos Allen. These workers had been hired by the company to replace the SUNTRACS workers. Such clashes were a violation of the procedures, established under the Labour Code by which workers can enforce their rights, violated the constitutional right of freedom of movement and resulted in damage to property. For these reasons the Mayor ordered the arrest of about 20 of the workers, who were subsequently released and enjoy full liberty.
3. 379. The Government provides a copy of the judicial ruling which fined Mr. Javier Méndez and Mr. Marcos Andrade the sum of 225 balboas for damaging property and stated that a group of persons presumed to be members of the trade union organization SUNTRACS had tried to obstruct workers who were working normally at a site in Los Lagos. The Government also supplies copies of the labour court ruling against a number of SUNTRACS members (Luis F. Araúz, Valentín Sanjur, Juan Rosero, Darío Ulate, Guillermo Ortega, Pormilio Beitía, Sebastián Hernández, Nicolás Romero, Saúl Méndez and Sixto Ferreira) imposing fines and five days of arrest for causing a breach of the peace and obstructing highways, disturbing public order, peace and safety and showing gross disrespect to the Mayor of Colón and his family. Mr. Alberto Gálvez was ordered to pay a fine equivalent to 40 days' arrest for obstructing the police and for disrespect towards authority.
4. 380. The Government indicates that the complainant itself states that the persons mentioned in the complaint were detained because they were accused of obstructing public highways, showing disrespect towards authority and disturbing public order. The Government considers that the alleged acts which have been established by the authorities (obstruction of highways, disturbances during illegal demonstrations, infringements of public order, peace and safety, damage to property, etc.) are not sanctioned by the ILO's freedom of association Conventions.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 381. The Committee observes that in the present case the complainant alleges that 25 trade unionists from the union SUNTRACS were detained following a peaceful demonstration during a strike, that the union's premises were raided, and that some of the detainees were ill-treated and held in inhuman conditions.
2. 382. The Committee notes that the Government denies that the demonstration was peaceful and states that the demonstrators destroyed or damaged property, committed acts of violence, tried to prevent other workers from working normally, prevented free movement by blocking roads and showed gross disrespect to the Mayor of Colón. In this regard, the Committee notes that, according to the Government, the acts of violence took place after the company Aribesa had dismissed five workers and decided subsequently -- citing as a reason the stoppage of construction work which occurred immediately afterwards -- to dismiss all the workers, and that the union regarded this action as a violation of the collective agreement and the accords signed with the company. The Committee emphasizes that, although a number of trade unionists were fined and/or sentenced to five days' detention by a court for the reasons indicated (and all of them have now been released), the company's decision to dismiss all the workers -- which according to the Government's statements has not yet been implemented -- seems excessive. Under these circumstances, the Committee appeals to the Government to mediate between the parties (the trade union SUNTRACS and the company Aribesa) with a view to resolving the problem of alleged failures to comply with legislation and the collective agreement cited by the union as well as the issue of the dismissals.
3. 383. Lastly, noting that the Government has not replied to the allegations concerning the raid of SUNTRACS premises and the ill-treatment and inhuman conditions suffered by a number of SUNTRACS members, the Committee requests the Government to send its observations on the matter.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 384. In the light of its foregoing interim conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:
   • (a) The Committee appeals to the Government to mediate between the parties (the trade union SUNTRACS and the company Aribesa) with a view to resolving the problem of alleged failures to comply with legislation and the collective agreement cited by the union as well as the problem of the dismissals.
   • (b) Noting that the Government has not replied to the allegations concerning the raid of SUNTRACS premises and the ill-treatment and inhuman conditions suffered by a number of SUNTRACS members, the Committee requests the Government to send its observations on the matter.