Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 1999, Publicación: 88ª reunión CIT (2000)

Convenio sobre la libertad sindical y la protección del derecho de sindicación, 1948 (núm. 87) - Seychelles (Ratificación : 1978)

The Committee takes note of the Government's report. The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the following:

Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention. With regard to the Registrar's power to refuse registration under section 9(1)(b) of the Industrial Act of 1993, the Committee took note of the decision of the Appeal Court in March 1995 which confirmed the Registrar's decision to refuse registration of the Seychelles Union of Public Employees on the grounds that article 15 of the Rules of the Union was ambiguous and too wide and would then conflict with the provisions of the 1993 Industrial Act. The Committee notes from the Government's latest report that the proposed Seychelles Union of Public Employees did not pursue registration based on an amended Constitution or otherwise. While taking note of this information, the Committee recalls that workers' organizations have the right to draw up their constitutions and their rules and that public authorities should refrain from any interference which would restrict this right. In addition, in relation to senior public officials, namely those exercising senior managerial or policy-making responsibilities, the Committee draws the Government's attention to the fact that these public servants should be entitled to establish their own organizations (see paragraph 57 of the General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining of 1994).

The right to strike. The Committee recalls the following points:

-- section 52(1)(a)(iv) stipulates that a strike has to be approved by two-thirds of union members present and voting at the meeting called for the purpose of considering the issue;

-- section 54(4) allows the minister to declare a strike to be unlawful if he is of the opinion that its continuance would endanger, amongst others, "public order of the national economy";

-- section 52(1)(b) provides for a cooling-off period of 60 days before a strike may commence; and

-- certain prohibitions of, or restrictions on the right to strike which may be in conformity with the principles of freedom of association sometimes provide for civil or penal sanctions against strikers and trade unions which violate these provisions.

The Committee notes the Government's information in its latest report according to which sections 52(1)(a)(iv), (1)(b) and (4) and 56(1)(a) and (b) have been submitted to the Attorney General for possible amendments. Nevertheless, the Committee, with regard to section 52(1)(a)(iv), recalls that a simple majority of workers having taken part in the voting in a bargaining unit should suffice to call a strike. With respect to section 52(4), the Committee reiterates its previous comments to the effect that the restrictions on the right to strike should be limited to situations of acute national crisis. Concerning section 52(1)(b), the Committee considers the cooling-off period of 60 days before a strike may commence to be too long, especially since persons involved in an unlawful strike are liable to imprisonment for six months under section 56(1)(a) and (b). Finally, the Committee reiterates the fact that, while certain prohibitions or restrictions on the right to strike may provide for civil or penal sanctions against strikers and trade unions which violate these provisions, such sanctions should not be disproportionate to the seriousness of the violations (see General Survey op. cit., paragraph 178).

The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the measures taken or envisaged to amend sections 52(1)(a)(iv), (1)(b) and (4) and 56(1)(a) and (b) in order to bring its legislation into greater conformity with the principles of freedom of association.