Effect given to the recommendations of the committee and the Governing Body - Report No 353, March 2009

Case No 2286 (Peru) - Complaint date: 05-MAY-03 - Closed

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

1. 190. At its November 2007 meeting, the Committee requested the Government: (1) to provide information regarding the outcome of the appeal lodged by Petro-Tech Peruana SA against the decision of the Criminal Court of Piura to dismiss the complaint against Mr Leónidas Campos Barrenzuela for allegedly forging documents; and (2) to inform it whether, subsequent to the special visit to inspect Petro-Tech Peruana SA, legal or administrative action was taken in relation to the alleged dismissals of workers belonging to the trade union [see 348th Report, para. 149].
2. 191. In its communications dated 12 March 2007 and 11 October 2008, the Government states that the second-instance Second Criminal Court of Sullana confirmed the definitive shelving of the proceedings relating to the alleged forgeries which had been instigated by Petro-Tech Peruana SA against the union’s General Secretary, Mr Leónidas Campos, thereby closing proceeding in this matter. Nevertheless, the company lodged an appeal (recurso de queja). The union and the company have in addition concluded a collective agreement, and there is no current file on any application by the union for intervention by the labour inspection authority.
3. 192. The Committee takes note of the Government’s information and requests it to communicate the outcome of the company’s appeal against the ruling of the second-instance court ordering the closure of the company’s complaint against the union official, Mr Leónidas Campos in connection with alleged forgerie .
4. 193. At the same time, the Committee notes that, since the previous examination of the case, the union has not sought any intervention by the labour inspection authority and thus appears to accept the outcome of a previous intervention by that authority in which, with regard to the dismissal of a number of union members, it was left to the parties involved to defend their rights through administrative or judicial proceedings [see 348th Report, paras 148 and 149].