Report in which the committee requests to be kept informed of development - Report No 392, October 2020

Case No 3183 (Burundi) - Complaint date: 28-DEC-15 - Follow-up

Allegations: The complainant organization denounces the anti-union dismissal and the suspension of the employment contracts of members of the executive committee of the trade union of the telecommunications enterprise

1. 299. The Committee examined the case brought by the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Burundi (CSB) at its meeting in June 2019 and on that occasion presented another interim report to the Governing Body [see 389th Report, approved by the Governing Body at its 336th Session (June 2019), paras 150–158].
2. 300. The Government sent its observations on 5 August 2020.
3. 301. Burundi has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98) and the Workers' Representatives Convention, 1971 (No. 135).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 302. In its previous examination of the case, in June 2019, the Committee made the following recommendations [see 389th Report, para. 158]:
   • (a) The Committee deplores that, despite the time that has elapsed since the presentation of the complaint, the Government has not provided the information it is expected to provide in response to the allegations made by the complainant organization and in response to the Committee’s recommendations, even though it has been asked to do so several times, including through urgent appeals, and even though a meeting to that effect was held, at the Committee’s request, with the Government delegation during the 107th Session of the International Labour Conference (May–June 2018). The Committee urges the Government to be more cooperative in the future.
   • (b) In these circumstances, the Committee can only urge the Government to: (i) provide copies of the decisions handed down by the courts concerned, as well as a copy of the Supreme Court decision as soon as handed down; and (ii) provide specific information on the situation of Mr Alain Christophe Irakiza, Mr Martin Floris Nahimana, Mr Bernard Mdikabandi and Ms Bégnigne Nahimana, and that of Mr Alexis Bizimana and, as appropriate, to take the necessary remedial measures, including reinstatement. The Committee requests the complainant organization to provide any additional information that it may have at its disposal.
   • (c) The Committee once again urges the Government to ask the employers’ organizations concerned, if they so desire, to provide information so that it can be aware of their version of events and know the views of the enterprise concerned on the pending issue.
   • (d) The Committee invites the Government to avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office, if it so desires, in order to determine the appropriate measures to address these recommendations effectively.

B. The Government’s reply

1. 303. In its communication of 5 August 2020, the Government indicates that the company ECONET LEO SA (hereinafter “the enterprise”) had applied to the General Labour Inspectorate to obtain authorization to dismiss the workers concerned (namely Mr Alain Christophe Irakiza, Mr Martin Floris Nahimana, Mr Bernard Mdikabandi and Ms Bégnigne Nahimana, all members of the SYTCOM executive committee), but that such authorization had not been granted in the absence of a valid reason. Dismissed by the Labour Court and then by the Bujumbura Court of Appeal, the enterprise submitted a further appeal against this decision to the Supreme Court, which overturned the decision of the Court of Appeal on procedural grounds. In its judgment RSA 7158 of 4 July 2017, the Court of Appeal upon referral held that in the absence of formal dismissal, the enterprise was required: (i) to pay the wages due up to the date on which the judgment was pronounced, namely, 4 July 2017; and (ii) to regularize the situation of the workers concerned, either by initiating a dismissal procedure in accordance with the law or by reintegrating the workers concerned. The Government indicates that the enterprise has filed a second application for cassation and that, at the same time, the Court of Appeal, which had been seized of an application for execution of judgment RSA 7158, sentenced the enterprise in a judgment dated 8 March 2019 (ROA 45/2019) to pay 17 months’ wages in addition to the 19 months’ wages included in the suspension period up to the date of judgment RSA 7158.

C. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 304. The Committee recalls that the allegations of the CSB relate to the suspension and dismissal, in 2015, of trade union representatives of the SYTCOM trade union in the context of the merger of two telecommunications enterprises in Burundi, which resulted in a staff reduction process. The individuals concerned by the suspension measure are Mr Alain Christophe Irakiza, Mr Martin Floris Nahimana, Mr Bernard Mdikabandi and Ms Bégnigne Nahimana. According to the complainant organization, these suspensions follow the unfair dismissal of another member of the SYTCOM executive committee, Mr Alexis Bizimana.
2. 305. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its communication of 5 August 2020 and welcomes the efforts made to describe the various legal procedures initiated. The Committee also notes that the President of the CSB countersigned the Government’s communication.
3. 306. While regretting that the court decisions referred to by the Government were not attached to the communication of 5 August 2020, the Committee takes note of the Court of Appeal’s decision RSA 7158 of 4 July 2017 that the enterprise is responsible for paying the wages of the unfairly dismissed trade unionists for the period of their unlawful suspension and to regularize their situation either by initiating a legal dismissal procedure or by reinstating them. The Committee notes, however, that the wages of the persons concerned have not been paid to date and their contractual situation has not been regularized. In this regard the Committee notes that the Government indicates that the enterprise filed a second application for cassation and that, at the same time, having been seized of an application for execution of judgment RSA 7158, the Court of Appeal sentenced the enterprise to pay 17 months’ wages in addition to the 19 months’ wages included in the suspension period up to the date of judgment RSA 7158 (judgment of 8 March 2019 (ROA 45/2019)). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the implementation of the remedies provided by the Court of Appeal in its decisions of 4 July 2017 and 8 March 2019, and on the outcome of the second appeal lodged by the enterprise before the Supreme Court.
4. 307. Furthermore, the Committee observes that the remedies determined by the appeals court concern only three of the four employees concerned (namely, Mr Alain Christophe Irakiza, Mr Bernard Mdikabandi and Ms Bégnigne Nahimana) and that the Government does not provide information with regard to the situation of Mr Martin Floris Nahimana or that of Mr Alexis Bizimana (see para. 6 above). The Committee requests the Government to provide specific information in this regard.

The Committee’s recommendations

1. 308. In the light of its foregoing conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:
   • (a) The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the implementation of the remedies provided by the appeals court in its decisions dated 4 July 2017 and 8 March 2019, as well as on the outcome of the second appeal lodged by the enterprise before the Supreme Court.
   • (b) Noting that the decisions in question do not cover the situation of all of the workers concerned, the Committee requests the Government to provide specific information on the situation of Mr Martin Floris Nahimana and that of Mr Alexis Bizimana.
   • (c) The Committee requests the Government to provide a copy of all of the legal decisions concerned.