Effect given to the recommendations of the committee and the Governing Body - Report No 338, November 2005

Case No 2158 (India) - Complaint date: 28-SEP-01 - Closed

Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body

1. 180. The Committee last examined this case at its March 2004 meeting [see 333rd Report, paras. 80-84]. On that occasion, it requested the Government to take all necessary measures so as to ensure that an independent judicial inquiry into the murder of trade union leader, Ashique Hossain, is concluded rapidly, to keep the Committee informed of the grounds on which two apprentices were dismissed from the Pataka Biri Co. and of the progress of proceedings for anti-union discrimination pending before the Calcutta High Court.
2. 181. In its communication of 27 April 2005, the Government indicated that the Home Department of the State Government had examined the Committee’s request to institute a judicial inquiry into the circumstances leading to the murder of Mr. Hossain and decided that, since a police case had already been opened and that it was expected that the charges would soon be brought, there was no need for further judicial inquiry.
3. 182. As regards the circumstances under which two apprentices were dismissed, the Government indicated that these two persons were hired as “trainees” and, after expiry of their training period, management decided not to hire them as regular employees. The Appellate Authority under the Beedi and Cigar Workers’ (Conditions of Employment) Act, 1966, rejected their appeal as both persons were only trainees and could not be qualified as “employees”. This decision of the Appellate Authority was now pending a review.
4. 183. As concerned the investigation into the allegations of serious acts of anti-union discrimination, the Government once again indicated that the complainant union had presented a list of demands which included requests to establish a works committee and to resolve such issues as conditions of appointment, service and overtime wages. The Government indicated that the local labour authorities requested the enterprise management to take steps in order to establish a works committee and to settle outstanding issues. Regarding other allegations, such as discrimination, harassment of workers, etc., according to the Government, the union had failed to furnish particulars of specific cases along with concrete evidence to the Labour Directorate despite several requests made to them in this regard.
5. 184. Finally, with regard to the proceedings before the Calcutta High Court concerning anti-union discrimination, the Government indicated that the Writ Petition No. WP-4449(W) of 2000 in the matter of Mozammel Hague and Others v. State of West Bengal was still pending. The State Government’s counsel had already been requested to move the hearing to an earlier date.
6. 185. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government. With regard to the murder of trade union leader, Mr. Ashique Hossain, the Committee once again recalls that the killing of trade union leaders and trade unionists requires the institution of independent judicial inquiries in order to shed light, at the earliest date, on the facts and the circumstances in which such actions occurred and in this way, to the extent possible, determine where responsibilities lie, punish the guilty parties and prevent the repetition of similar events [see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, 4th edition, 1996, para. 51]. The Committee trusts that, following the police investigation referred to by the Government, charges will be rapidly brought against those suspected of the murder of Mr. Hossain, and the guilty persons will punished. It requests the Government to keep it informed of the progress made in this regard.
7. 186. As for the previous request of the Committee to inform it of the circumstances under which two apprentices were dismissed, while noting the Government’s argument that these persons were not victims of a dismissal but rather were not hired at the end of their traineeship, the Committee considers that this does not exclude the possibility that these two persons were victims of anti-union discrimination at the hiring stage. It considers furthermore that the legislation should allow the possibility to appeal against discrimination in hiring, i.e. even before the workers could be qualified as “employees”. The Committee therefore requests the Government to conduct an independent investigation into the allegations of anti-union discrimination made by these two apprentices and to keep it informed of the outcome.
8. 187. Finally, the Committee requests the Government to continue to keep it informed of the progress of proceedings of anti-union discrimination pending before the Calcutta High Court.