Informe provisional - Informe núm. 101, 1968

Caso núm. 506 (Liberia) - Fecha de presentación de la queja:: 26-ENE-67 - Cerrado

1. 407. The Committee examined this case previously at its meeting held in May 1967, when it submitted to the Governing Body the interim report contained in paragraphs 47 to 101 of its 99th Report. The report was approved by the Governing Body at its 169th Session (June 1967).
2. 408. Certain of the allegations were the subject of final recommendations made by the Committee and approved by the Governing Body. The following paragraphs deal only with those allegations which remained outstanding.
3. 409. By a communication dated 11 September 1967 the Government supplied certain information in reply to the requests of the Governing Body.
4. 410. Liberia 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. A. The complainants' allegations

• Allegations relating to the Act of 9 February 1966 to Restore, Supplement and Enlarge Emergency Powers Granted to the President of Liberia
  411. 411 When the Committee considered this aspect of the case at its session in May 1967, it requested the Government, in view of the expiry of the Act of 9 February 1966, to be good enough to confirm that any further emergency powers legislation did not contain provisions similar to those which, it was alleged, constituted a violation of trade union rights. It also requested the Government to furnish the text of any new emergency legislation.
  412. 412 In its communication of 11 September 1967 the Government recalls the circumstances which, it claims, necessitated emergency powers legislation. In particular, it adds that " it is fair to say that the existing emergency legislation now in force, which was promulgated on 21 March 1967, was enacted to foil any attempt at sabotage without special reference to trade unions ". The Government also supplies the text of the new emergency legislation, entitled " An Act Extending Emergency Powers Granted the President of Liberia ", promulgated on 21 March 1967.
  413. 413 The Committee notes that the new Act is different in certain respects from the provisions of the previous Act. The first difference is that the preamble no longer refers to " evidence of infiltration into the country through some labour unions and detestable persons entering the country with the intention of creating tension, subversion designed to disrupt the peace and stability of the Government of the Republic ", nor to other undefined threats to the security of the State. The preamble to the Act of 21 March 1967 invokes " uncertain conditions prevailing in the world today ". Secondly, section 1 (t) of the Act of 9 February 1966, which provided that illegal strikes were deemed to be a threat to the security of the State and provided for the summary treatment of all persons guilty of aiding, abetting, encouraging or participating in such strikes, is not repeated in the Act of 21 March 1967. Similarly, section 1 (u), which deemed leaders of illegal strikes to be guilty of an attempt to overthrow the Government and endanger the safety of the State and provided for their summary treatment, is not repeated. Finally, subsections (r) and (s) of section 1, which form the basis of this part of the complaint, are amended, so that where previously they referred to " labour unions ", they now refer to " organisations ".
  414. 414 Section 1 (r) of the Act of 21 March 1967 provides for the banning of " any and all organisations where there is evidence that they are under the influence or direction of any outside source ". Section 1 (s) of the same Act provides for the banning of " any and all organisations where there is evidence that they receive financial assistance or other benefits from any outside source unless such financial assistance or other benefits be approved by and channelled through Government ".
  415. 415 The Act is in force for a period of one calendar year, that is until 20 March 1968.
  416. 416 The complainants made allegations concerning subsections (r) and (s) of section 1 of the Act of 9 February 1966. As the Committee pointed out in paragraph 413 above, subsections (r) and (s) of section 1 of the Act of 21 March 1967 differ from the corresponding provision of the former Act, in that where formerly they referred to " labour unions ", they now refer to " organisations ". However, since trade unions must be understood as coming within the term " organisations ", the substance of these allegations remains unchanged as far as trade unions are concerned.
  417. 417 The allegations are that, in so far as they relate to trade union organisations, the two provisions in question constitute a violation of Article 5 of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), which provides, inter alia, that national trade union organisations shall have the right to affiliate with international trade union organisations. In particular, the International Federation of Plantation, Agricultural and Allied Workers (I.F.P.A.A.W.) contends that, in practice, the powers given to the Government in the above-mentioned provisions have been used and are being used to interfere with and hamper the free exercise of normal trade union activities. As examples of this interference, the complainant alleges that meetings between international trade union organisation representatives and Liberian trade unionists are, unless given the sanction of the Government, prohibited and that trade unionists are obliged to obtain specific permission from the Government before being able to participate outside Liberia in meetings or conferences of international trade union organisations with which their union is affiliated or of which they are elected officials.
  418. 418 Apart from the information summarised in paragraph 412 above, the Government does not make any reference in its communication of 11 September 1967 to this aspect of the case.
  419. 419 The Committee wishes to recall the principle of the right of affiliation to international trade union organisations, which is granted to trade unions by Article 5 of Convention No. 87.
  420. 420 The Committee wishes to point out that, in previous cases, it has applied the principle that this right of affiliation carries with it the right of representatives of national organisations to maintain contact with the international organisations with which they are affiliated and to take part in the work of those organisations.
  421. 421 The Committee also wishes to point out that another necessary corollary of the right of affiliation is the right of national trade union organisations to receive the benefits which may result from such affiliation.
  422. 422 The Committee notes from the evidence adduced by the complainants and not challenged by the Government that, in practice, neither of these aspects of the right of international affiliation has been respected.
  423. 423 Accordingly, the Committee, while appreciating the changes made in the new emergency legislation, whereby there is no longer any reference to labour unions, considers that subsections (r) and (s) of section I of the Act in question, to the extent that they apply to the right of international affiliation of trade unions, are not compatible with the principle enunciated in Article 5 of the Convention.
  424. 424 In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
       • (a) to note the differences between the Act of 9 February 1966 and that of 21 March 1967, appreciating in particular the exclusion of specific reference to trade unions;
       • (b) to note that subsections (r) and (s) of section 1 of the Act of 21 March 1967, to the extent that they might refer to the right of international affiliation of trade unions, are not compatible with Article 5 of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), ratified by Liberia;
       • (c) to express to the Government the hope that it will take account of the Committee's comments:
       • (i) in the application to trade unions of subsections (r) and (s) of section 1 of the Act of 21 March 1967;
       • (ii) in the enactment of any new legislation on the expiry of the Act of 21 March 1967;
       • (d) to request the Government to be good enough to keep the Governing Body informed of the state of its legislation and practice with regard to the right enunciated in Article 5 of Convention No. 87.
  425. Allegations relating to the Act of 11 February 1966 to Amend the Labour Practices Law
  425. 425 These allegations, previously considered by the Committee at its meeting in May 1967, refer to section 4601-A of the Law, which provides that " no industrial labour union or organisation shall exercise any privilege or function for agricultural workers and no agricultural labour union or organisation shall exercise any privilege or function for industrial workers ". This provision, it is alleged, is contrary to Article 5 of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), which states, inter alia, that workers' organisations shall have the right to establish federations and Confederations.
  426. 426 When it considered the case in May 1967, the Committee submitted a recommendation to the Governing Body, which approved it, to request the Government to be good enough to furnish its observations on the allegations referred to in paragraph 70 of the Committee's 99th Report.
  427. 427 Paragraph 70 of the 99th Report is as follows:
• If the Committee understands the position correctly, the single Liberian trade union centre, the Congress of Industrial Organisations, is a national Confederation of which the occupational unions in the various branches are constituents. It is alleged that the plantation or agricultural workers had in fact been organised to some extent by the C.I.O but that such degree of organisation as had been achieved among them was ended by the amendment made to the Labour Practices Law on 11 February 1966, and that the Law as now applied prevents the C.I.O directly seeking to further the interests of plantation workers and to assist them to organise in a union or unions under its own aegis and as a constituent union or unions of this national trade union centre or Confederation, and also prevents the existence of a single national trade union centre including all the trade union organisations in the country. The Government has not dealt with these specific aspects of the matter in its observations.
  428. 428 In its communication of 11 September 1967 the Government reiterates its opposition to a single trade union incorporating both agricultural and industrial workers. It declares, however, in connection with the C.I.O, that it wishes to repeat its previous observations which stated, inter alia, that the Government fully recognises and accepts the right of industrial unions and agricultural unions to affiliate at the national level.
  429. 429 The Committee accepts, on the basis of the assurances given by the Government, that the Law does not prevent an agricultural union from affiliating to the C.I.O, provided that the union in question is in fact a union grouping exclusively agricultural workers and not a mixed agricultural-industrial union.
  430. 430 It therefore considers that the allegations claiming that the Law prevented the existence of a single national trade union centre including all trade union organisations do not call for further examination.
  431. 431 While appreciating the clear restatement of the Government's position, the Committee notes that the Government's observations do not reply specifically to certain of the allegations referred to in paragraph 70 of the Committee's 99th Report, namely that the Law had destroyed such degree of organisation as had been achieved among plantation or agricultural workers and that the Law, as now applied, prevented the C.I.O directly seeking to further the interests of plantation workers and to assist them to organise in a union or unions under its own aegis.
  432. 432 In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
       • (a) with respect to the allegations that the Law prevented the existence of a single national trade union centre including all the trade union organisations in the country:
       • (i) to note the Government's assurance that the Law does not prevent an exclusively agricultural union from affiliating to the C.I.O.;
       • (ii) to decide that these allegations do not call for further examination;
       • (b) to request the Government to be good enough to furnish its observations on the specific allegations referred to in paragraph 431 above.
  433. Allegations relating to Strikes
  433. 433 When the Committee examined the case at its session in May 1967, it had before it allegations relating to the arrest and detention of various trade unionists on the grounds of their participation in illegal strikes. The complainants further alleged that the strikes were illegal by virtue of having contravened provisions whereby labour disputes are to be submitted to a Labour Practices Review Board and a withdrawal of labour is only lawful once the Board has given a decision on the dispute before it. The complainants alleged that the Government failed to convene the Board within a reasonable period of time, that grievances accumulated over long periods and that, not surprisingly, there occurred strikes which violated the law, rendering the individuals responsible liable to severe penalties. Accordingly, the Governing Body, on the recommendation of the Committee, asked the Government for further information on the functioning of the Labour Practices Review Board and for the reason why certain strikes in iron ore mines and rubber plantations referred to in the complaints were illegal.
  434. 434 The Committee has always applied the principle that allegations respecting the right to strike are not outside its competence in so far as they affect the exercise of trade union rights.
  435. 435 In its communication of 11 September 1967 the Government states that the strikes in the iron ore mines and rubber plantations were illegal because the requirements of notices and secret ballot laid down in sections 4400 and 4503 of the Act to Amend the Labour Practices Law in relation to the Rights and Duties of Labour Organisations and the Members Thereof were not complied with.
  436. 436 The Government adds that in the Lamco Mining Company strike of July 1966 there was the additional element of violent picketing which involved the violation of section 4502 of the Act.
  437. 437 It appears from the information before the Committee that the conditions required by law for going on strike were not, in these instances, respected, and that, in one case, violent picketing was involved.
  438. 438 The Committee accordingly considers that in these circumstances it has not been established that the Government violated trade union rights, and therefore recommends the Governing Body to decide that this aspect of the case does not call for further examination.
• Allegations relating to the Arrest and Detention of Messrs. Monger, Murray and Kawah, Respectively President, Treasurer and Secretary of the Lamco Mine Workers' Union
  439. 439 When it considered the case in May 1967, the Committee had before it allegations that, impliedly on account of the Lamco strike, Messrs. Monger, Murray and Kawah, respectively President, Treasurer and Secretary of the Lamco Mine Workers' Union, were arrested on 23 July 1966, the first two not being released until November, without any charges ever having been brought against them. The Governing Body, on the recommendation of the Committee, requested the Government to be good enough to furnish its observations on these allegations.
  440. 440 In its communication of 11 September 1967 the Government, after referring to its doubts on the propriety of international trade union organisations inquiring into such matters, relates in some detail the facts surrounding the detention of Messrs. Monger and Murray. The Government contends that Messrs. Monger and Murray were the only persons arrested, denying that Mr. Kawah was arrested.
  441. 441 The Government states that Messrs. Monger and Murray instigated a strike at the Lamco mine by failing to refer the workers' grievances to the management, in contravention of the legal provisions relating to strikes, and by misleading the workers. Once the strike had begun, Mr. Monger, it is claimed, left the area of the Lamco mine and could not be located. When he was finally found, the Government persuaded him to use his influence with the strikers to get them to return to work. The Government claims that Mr. Monger failed in this attempt, firstly because he was not sincere in his efforts and secondly because he had so badly misled the workers in the first place that they were not now prepared to call off the strike. The Government also refers to the purchase of arms through the efforts of Messrs. Monger and Murray for the use of workers during the strike. About 40 such arms were later seized from strikers.
  442. 442 The Government further invokes the unpatriotic and disrespectful disregard by Messrs. Monger and Murray for a letter from the President of the Republic calling on the workers to return to work.
  443. 443 In conclusion, the Government indicates that, in addition to being unpatriotic, subversive and a danger to economic peace and stability, the action of Messrs. Monger and Murray was in violation of legislative provisions relating to strikes.
  444. 444 While noting the information supplied by the Government and summarised above, the Committee must emphasise, as it did when it considered the case in May 1967, the importance which it has always attached, in cases in which trade unionists have been detained, to the right of all detained persons to receive a fair trial at the earliest possible moment by an impartial and independent judicial authority. Since, however, the detained persons in question have now been released, the Committee does not consider that any useful purpose would now be served by further examination of this aspect of the case.
  445. 445 In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
       • (a) to emphasise the importance which the Governing Body has always attached, in cases in which trade unionists have been detained, to the right of all detained persons to receive a fair trial at the earliest possible moment;
       • (b) to decide that, in view of the release of all the detained persons in question, this aspect of the case does not call for further examination.
  446. Allegations relating to the Rubber Tappers' Association
  446. 446 When it considered the case at its session in May 1967, the Committee had before it certain allegations to the effect that in January 1966, following a strike, the Government had formed a union-the Rubber Tappers' Association-and had selected its officials. Since that time, it was claimed, the union had come under the control of the company where its members were employed. It was alleged that the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), was thereby violated.
  447. 447 In its communication of 11 September 1967 the Government states that, during the investigation held into the strike which took place in the Firestone plantations in January/ February 1966, the Government noted that there was no organised union grouping the workers in question and that this want of organisation and leadership had led to arbitrary action on the part of the strikers. The Government accordingly suggested to the workers to organise. It states that the Labour Inspectorate supervised the elections and denies that the Government selected the union leaders. The report of the labour inspector assigned to the area in question is quoted in the Government's communication. It states, inter alia, that, since the individuals at the head of the embryo organisation were not familiar with the procedure and requirements in establishing such an organisation, technical assistance was provided by the Government. The report goes on to declare that " such technical assistance, in our opinion, should not be considered as Government interference with the affairs of the ... organisation. One of the main functions and duties of any Labour Department or Agency is to provide technical advice to both labour and management from time to time in order to ensure industrial peace and stability ".
  448. 448 With regard to the allegations that the Rubber Tappers' Association had come under company control, the labour inspector's report states that, on becoming aware that the company was attempting to assume control of the Association, the Government intervened, informing the company that such action was illegal and contrary to an International Labour Convention. The report claims that thereupon the company abandoned its attempts to control the union.
  449. 449 On the basis of the information furnished by the Government, the Committee considers that there is nothing objectionable in the advice and assistance given by the Government in the formation of the Rubber Tappers' Association.
  450. 450 As for the allegation concerning company control of the Rubber Tappers' Association, the Committee, having noted the assurances given by the Government that, despite attempts by the company to gain control of the Association, the latter has retained its independence, considers that the complainants have not furnished proof that there has been a violation of trade union rights.
  451. 451 In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
       • (a) to take note of the statements made by the Government to the effect that the Rubber Tappers' Association has not been controlled, in such manner as would constitute a violation of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), either by the Government or by the company;
       • (b) to decide, on the basis of these statements, that this aspect of the case does not call for further examination.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 452. In all the circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
2. (1) with regard to the allegations relating to the Act of 9 February 1966 to Restore, Supplement and Enlarge Emergency Powers Granted to the President of Liberia:
   • (a) to note the differences between the Act of 9 February 1966 and that of 21 March 1967, appreciating in particular the exclusion of specific reference to trade unions;
   • (b) to note that subsections (r) and (s) of section 1 of the Act of 21 March 1967, to the extent that they might refer to the right of international affiliation of trade unions, are not compatible with Article 5 of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), ratified by Liberia;
   • (c) to express to the Government the hope that it will take account of the Committee's comments:
   • (i) in the application to trade unions of subsections (r) and (s) of section 1 of the Act of 21 March 1967;
   • (ii) in the enactment of any new legislation, on the expiry of the Act of 21 March 1967;
   • (d) to request the Government to be good enough to keep the Governing Body informed of the state of its legislation and practice with regard to the right enunciated in Article 5 of Convention No. 87;
3. (2) with regard to the allegations concerning the Act to Amend the Labour Practices Law of 11 February 1966:
   • (a) as regards the allegations that the Act to Amend the Labour Practices Law of 11 February 1966 prevented the existence of a single national trade union centre including all the trade union organisations in the country:
   • (i) to note the Government's assurance that the law does not prevent an exclusively agricultural union from affiliating to the C.I.O.;
   • (ii) to decide that these allegations do not call for further examination;
   • (b) to request the Government to be good enough to furnish its observations on the specific allegations referred to in paragraph 431 above;
4. (3) with regard to the allegations relating to strikes, and considering that such allegations are not outside the competence of the Committee in so far as they relate to the exercise of trade union rights, to decide, for the reasons indicated in paragraph 438 above, that these allegations do not call for further examination;
5. (4) with regard to the allegations relating to the arrest and detention of Messrs. Monger, Murray and Kawah, respectively President, Treasurer and Secretary of the Lamco Mine Workers' Union:
   • (a) to emphasise the importance which the Governing Body has always attached, in cases in which trade unionists have been detained, to the right of all detained persons to receive a fair trial at the earliest possible moment;
   • (b) to decide that, in view of the release of all the detained persons in question, this aspect of the case does not call for further examination;
6. (5) with regard to the allegations relating to the Rubber Tappers' Association:
   • (a) to take note of the statements made by the Government to the effect that the Rubber Tappers' Association has not been controlled, in such manner as would constitute a violation of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), either by the Government or by the company;
   • (b) to decide, on the basis of these statements, that this aspect of the case does not call for further examination;
7. (6) to take note of the present interim report, it being understood that the Committee will report further to the Governing Body when the information referred to in subparagraphs (1) (d) and (2) (b) above has been received.