Informe provisional - Informe núm. 292, Marzo 1994

Caso núm. 1646 (Marruecos) - Fecha de presentación de la queja:: 12-MAY-92 - Cerrado

1. 614. The Committee examined this case at its February 1993 meeting (see 286th Report of the Committee, paras. 647-673, approved by the Governing Body at its 255th Session (March 1993)), when it reached interim conclusions.
2. 615. The Government sent new observations in a communication dated 6 October 1993.
3. 616. Morocco has ratified the Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), but not the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize Convention, 1948 (No. 87).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 617. At its February 1993 meeting, the Committee examined allegations concerning measures taken by the management of the Autonomous Urban Transport Company of Casablanca (RATC) and the local authorities during a strike launched by RATC workers on 17 February 1992, for the purpose of obtaining better conditions of employment. These measures included, in particular, the recruitment by the RATC management of more than 300 new employees, the arbitrary transfer and dismissal of strikers, and the imprisonment and trial of Messrs. Nejmi Abdellatif, Kassih Abdelaziz, Touga Ahmed and Maâ Noureddine, militant trade unionists who participated in the strike.
2. 618. At this meeting, the Committee made the following recommendations (see 286th Report of the Committee, para. 673):
   • (a) Recalling that the right to strike is one of the essential means available to workers' organizations to promote and defend the economic and social interests of their members, the Committee calls on the Government to refrain from the use of measures in the future which are not in conformity with freedom of association principles.
   • (b) Recalling that recourse to such measures as the transfer or dismissal of workers because of their participation in a strike is a violation of freedom of association, the Committee asks the Government to indicate whether striking workers were transferred, and if so, for what reasons, and to indicate if the workers dismissed have actually been reinstated in their jobs.
   • (c) As regards the imprisonment and sentencing of striking trade union militants, Mr. Nejmi Abdellatif, Kassih Abdelaziz, Touga Ahmed and Maâ Noureddine, the Committee, in order to have all the necessary information on this aspect of the case, requests the Government to provide as soon as possible detailed information on the charges brought against these persons and to communicate the text of the sentences issued and the reasons adduced.
   • (d) The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the judicial proceedings allegedly still under way against two staff members who went on strike.

B. The Government's further reply

1. 619. In its communication of 6 October 1993, the Government states that the right to strike is guaranteed by the Constitution and is publicly exercised in practice. According to the Government, this is demonstrated by the number of strikes launched by workers in many sectors, in establishments where trade union organizations are represented as well as in establishments where they are not. The exercise of trade union rights is respected in accordance with the principles adopted by the Committee on Freedom of Association.
2. 620. As regards the proceedings brought against several employees of the Autonomous Urban Transport Company of Casablanca (RATC), the Government believes it is necessary to provide more detailed information concerning the inquiries which have been conducted, the validity of the proceedings and the verdicts handed down against these employees.
3. 621. According to the Government, Lotfi Mostapha, an employee of the RATC, complained with the police that he was stopped by three employees of the company as he was getting off an RATC vehicle, that they insulted and threatened him, incited him to participate in the strike and could have injured him, if he had not fled.
4. 622. As part of the inquiry, the police interviewed the driver of the vehicle, who stated that Touga Ahmed, Kassih Abdelaziz and Nejmi Abdellatif approached him, ordering him to stop. They asked him why he continued to work instead of striking as the other unionized workers did, and incited him to stop working and to join them to ensure the success of the strike. Lotfi Mostapha, who was in the vehicle, got out and intervened between the driver and the strikers. He was insulted and threatened with a knife.
5. 623. When summoned by the police to state their case, the defendants said that they had noticed the vehicle during the strike. They tried to keep the driver from working and incited him to participate in the strike with them. When Lotfi Mostapha intervened between them and the driver, they insulted him, threatened him and incited him to strike.
6. 624. Following an examination of the police report by the judicial police on 2 April 1992, charges were brought against the three defendants for obstructing the right to work, in accordance with the provisions of section 288 of the Criminal Code. The Government states that their cases were subject to the procedure reserved for defendants caught in the act under sections 76 (as amended) and 395 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The defendants were brought under arrest, before a court. When questioned by the prosecutor in the presence of their lawyers they denied the charges brought against them and the statements they had made to the police. Their cases were subsequently referred to a court.
7. 625. As regards the verdicts, the Government states that the court summoned the defendants to several hearings, that they benefited fully from due process of the law, that they were assisted by attorneys and that they were entirely free to raise any defence. Once the case was heard in accordance with the legal procedures and in a public trial, as required by law, and after the defence attorneys had addressed the court, the public prosecutor asked for a conviction based on the statements made to the judicial police. On 12 October 1992 the court of first instance of Casablanca gave Touga Ahmed, Kassih Abdelaziz and Nejmi Abdellatif a one-month suspended sentence and fined them 200 dirhams for obstructing the right to work. The Government emphasizes that the court recognized extenuating circumstances in the light of their social situation and the absence of prior criminal records in giving them a one-month suspended sentence, insofar as the law provides for a minimum sentence of one month's imprisonment for such offences. The Government adds that the defendants appealed against this sentence.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 626. The Committee notes that the Government states once again that the right to strike is guaranteed by the Constitution, that workers in numerous sectors often resort to strikes and that the exercise of trade union rights is respected in accordance with the principles adopted by the Committee on Freedom of Association.
2. 627. The Committee none the less observes that in the last few years it has examined a growing number of allegations concerning serious restrictions on the right to strike in Morocco, including physical attacks, arrests, convictions, dismissals or other measures of anti-union discrimination in employment and the repression of demonstrations and strike movements, which are contrary to the principles of freedom of association (see, inter alia, 281st Report, Case No. 1574, para. 219; 286th Report, Case No. 1640, para. 644; 287th Report, Case No. 1589, paras. 154 and 156; Case No. 1643, paras. 193, 195, 196 and 198). The Committee can only express its concern at this situation and is obliged once again to remind the Government of the importance it attaches to the right to strike as one of the essential means through which workers' organizations may promote and defend the economic and social interests of their members. (Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, 3rd edition, para. 363.) It again requests the Government to take all measures necessary to ensure that the right to resort to strikes may be exercised without the intervention of the public authorities and with respect for the principles of freedom of association.
3. 628. As regards the imprisonment and trial of the striking trade union militants, Messrs. Nejmi Abdellatif, Kassih Abdelaziz and Touga Ahmed, the Committee takes note of the detailed information provided by the Government concerning the inquiries, judicial proceedings and trials of their cases. It observes that the Government states that the defendants were convicted by the court of first instance of Casablanca and given a one-month suspended sentence and fined 200 dirhams for having obstructed the right to work, and that the court recognized extenuating circumstances in the light of their social situation and absence of prior criminal records. The Committee recalls that taking part in picketing, and firmly but peaceably inciting other workers to keep away from their workplace, cannot be considered unlawful. The case is different, however, when picketing is accompanied by violence or coercion of non-strikers in an attempt to interfere with their freedom to work; such acts constitute criminal offences in many countries (Digest, op. cit., para. 435). Emphasizing the danger for the free exercise of trade union rights of measures of detention and sentencing of workers' representatives for activities performed in the defence of the interests of their members, the Committee urges the Government to take all measures necessary to ensure that this principle is respected and, in any event, to keep it informed of the outcome of the appeal made by Messrs. Nejmi Abdellatif, Kassih Abdelaziz and Touga Ahmed against the verdict of the court of first instance.
4. 629. The Committee further notes with regret that the Government has not provided any information concerning the striking trade union militant, Mr. Maâ Noureddine, who, according to the allegations, was also imprisoned and tried by the authorities on contrived charges. It urgently requests the Government to provide detailed information on the charges brought against him, and to furnish a copy of the text of the verdict issued, along with reasons adduced.
5. 630. As regards the allegations concerning the arbitrary transfer and dismissal of striking workers by the management of the RATC, the Committee notes with regret that the Government has not replied. Recalling that recourse to such measures as the transfer or dismissal of workers because of their participation in a strike is a violation of freedom of association (Digest, op. cit., para. 444), the Committee urgently requests the Government to indicate whether the striking workers were transferred, and if so for what reasons, and if all the workers dismissed have actually been reinstated in their jobs.
6. 631. Similarly, as regards the allegations concerning the judicial proceedings against two striking staff members of the RATC, the Committee urgently requests the Government to send its observations.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 632. In the light of its foregoing interim conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:
   • (a) The Committee once again requests the Government to take all measures necessary so that the right to resort to strikes may be exercised without the intervention of the public authorities and with respect for the principles of freedom of association.
   • (b) Emphasizing the danger for the free exercise of trade union rights of measures of detention and sentencing of workers' representatives for activities performed in the defence of the interests of their members, the Committee urges the Government to take all measures necessary to ensure that this principle is respected, and to keep it informed of the outcome of the appeal made by Messrs. Nejmi Abdellatif, Kassih Abdelaziz and Touga Ahmed against the verdict of the court of first instance.
   • (c) As regards the striking trade union militant, Mr. Maâ Noureddine, who was reportedly imprisoned and tried by the authorities on the basis of contrived charges, the Committee regrets that the Government has not replied. It urgently requests that it provide detailed information on the charges brought against him and furnish a copy of the text of the verdict issued, along with its reasons adduced.
   • (d) Recalling once again that recourse to such measures as the transfer or dismissal of workers because of their participation in a strike is a violation of freedom of association, the Committee urgently requests the Government to indicate whether the striking workers were transferred, and if so for what reasons, and if all the workers dismissed have actually been reinstated in their jobs.
   • (e) Similarly, the Committee requests the Government to send its observations as soon as possible on the allegations concerning the judicial proceedings brought against two striking staff members of the RATC.