Informe provisional - Informe núm. 304, Junio 1996

Caso núm. 1863 (Guinea) - Fecha de presentación de la queja:: 19-DIC-95 - Cerrado

Allegations: Repression, arrests and conviction of trade union leaders and strikers following a labour dispute in the teaching sector, transfer of a trade union member and withholding of wages for strike action

1. 321. In a communication dated 19 December 1995 the Trade Union of Workers of Guinea (USTG) presented a complaint against the Government of Guinea for violation of freedom of association. On 16 January 1996 the USTG provided additional information to support its complaint. The Government sent its observations in a communication dated 11 March 1996.
2. 322. Guinea 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. The complainant's allegations

1. 323. In its complaint dated 19 December 1995 the USTG alleges that the Government of Guinea has violated trade union rights. Specifically, it cites the Government's refusal to negotiate with teachers' organizations, the arbitrary arrest of Mr. M'Bemba Soumah, General Secretary of the Free Trade Union of Teachers and Researchers of Guinea (SLECG), Mr. Souleymane Condé and other trade union leaders, the arbitrary transfer of union members, the withholding of wages for strike action, and other forms of intimidation following a labour dispute in the teaching sector.
2. 324. The USTG explains that since 12 April 1994 it has vainly been demanding a wage increase for teachers and researchers to protect their purchasing power in the face of rampant inflation in Guinea. As no satisfactory agreement had been reached, the SLECG had had no option but to give notice of strike action on 27 November 1995. The 72-hour strike began on Monday 18 December 1995. According to the complainant organization, the Government's response to the protest movement was the mass arrest of teachers and researchers across the country. The complainant believes that the Government's arbitrary action breaches Article 3, paragraph 2, of Convention No. 87, Article 4 of Convention No. 98 and Article 5 of Convention No. 154.
3. 325. The USTG provides additional information and material evidence to support its complaint in a subsequent communication dated 16 January 1996. It points out that everything started on 1 November 1995 when the SLECG issued a memorandum asking that teachers' basic wage be increased, an issue that had been part of the union's platform of action since 12 April 1994 but had not been negotiated. The memorandum of 1 November 1995, which the complainant organization enclosed, criticizes inter alia the failure correctly to apply the regulations governing teachers at pre-university level and in higher education, and researchers, delays in the payment of wages, the breakdown of national scientific research because the national directorate has no permanent base and senior staff are left to their own devices, and the collapse of the national library much of whose collection of material is still packed away in boxes. The memorandum refers specifically to the constant rise in the cost of living and the endemic debt problem facing teachers who have to take out high-interest mortgages to provide for their families. The memorandum therefore calls for an adjustment of basic wages and of the index point and the introduction of a minimum guaranteed inter-occupational wage (SMIG).
4. 326. The USTG also encloses the strike notice that was lodged on 27 November 1995 and the notice of the 72-hour national general strike by teachers and researchers from 18 to 20 December 1995. In its preamble, the strike notice says, inter alia, that the strike was called because none of the demands in the memorandum of 1 November 1995 had been met and that the slow pace of negotiations was not conducive to a genuine dialogue on the main demands that will ensure an early solution to the problems raised.
5. 327. The USTG goes on to state that at the behest of the education authorities, the union leaders on the national executive of the Trade Union Federation of Educators (FSPE), the rival union also representing teachers, which is affiliated to the National Confederation of Workers of Guinea, refused to support the union action and used radio and television broadcasts to appeal to their members to do likewise. The USTG adds that the strike went ahead anyway and was supported both in the capital, Conakry, and across the country.
6. 328. The USTG acknowledges that the Minister of Labour sent a letter on 12 December inviting the trade union confederations, the CNTG and the USTG, to negotiations to be held on public service remuneration. The USTG encloses a copy of the letter in which the Minister of Labour pointed out in particular that the question of public service remuneration raised by the SLECG and the FSPE had been shelved until broader-based negotiations could be held because of its importance for all state officials, including teachers, and that negotiations would begin on Friday, 15 December 1995 at 9 a.m.
7. 329. The USTG explains that its reply, which it enclosed with its communication, stated that the SLECG, which is affiliated to the USTG and author of the memorandum, should be the only organization at the negotiating table. The USTG also encloses the reply dated 19 December sent by the Minister of Labour in which she explained that her department seemed to have arrived at a consensus that wage negotiations covering the entire public service should be held with the USTG and CNTG, which were the only confederations operating both in the teaching sector and in the rest of the public service. She went on to say that these negotiations were a follow-up to the SLECG memorandum and to the negotiations held with the SLECG in 1994 and the FSPE in 1995 on matters that had been shelved until specific and broader-based negotiations could be held. In her letter she called for extensive consultation with representatives of public officials on a common package of demands and reaffirmed that she was ready to enter into negotiations, to which the USTG was officially invited, as soon as possible.
8. 330. However, the USTG alleges that, at the same time as these letters were being exchanged, the Minister for Pre-University Education and Vocational Training had apparently decided to scupper the SLECG's trade union action. On 18 December 1995 the General Secretary of the SLECG, Mr. Soumah, was arrested at about 9.30 p.m. and held at the criminal investigation department with another teachers' union leader, Mr. Condé. They were transferred to the civil prison in Conakry 48 hours later, where they were both released on 21 December 1995 after various trade unions affiliated to the USTG expressed their solidarity and the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) intervened.
9. 331. According to the USTG, however, on 20 December 1995 the Minister for Pre-University Education went on radio to ask local authorities to use rural radio stations to misinform teachers across the country and try to sabotage the strike movement.
10. 332. The USTG also points out that on 20 December 1995 the SLECG national executive called a general assembly to discuss the follow-up to the strike. It alleges that the police broke up the meeting of teachers and researchers using tear gas and truncheons, and arrested six teachers. They were held for 48 hours at the criminal investigation department and then transferred to the prison in Conakry, charged with taking part in an unauthorized meeting and violating the freedom to work of the staff at the Donka school complex. The six teachers were tried on 29 December by the correctional court of Conakry and given a one-year suspended sentence. On 28 December 1995 teachers Mamadou Cellou Diallo from the Sangoya College and Mohamed Sankhou from the Yimbaya College were allegedly arrested, and the Governor of the province of N'Zérékore decided that the General Secretary of the SLECG union of Guéckédou in Guinée-Forestière, Mr. Frantoma Bereta, should be transferred to Macenta. The complainant organization encloses the transfer order. It was announced that the wages of the teachers who took part in the strike at the Dubreka secondary school and college, and the Lansana Conté elementary school would be docked for the hours and days they were away from work. Finally, on 3 January 1996 the local prefect ordered the arrest of the SLECG representative in Télimélé. He was released three days later following pressure from and steps taken by the Human Rights Organization of Guinea (OGDH).

B. The Government's reply

1. 333. The Government explains in a highly detailed communication dated 11 March 1996 that, since the CNTG-led negotiations concerning all public officials in May 1995, it has continued dialogue with the teachers whose FSPE union leaders were championing their demands at that time. The Government, with no particular regard to the idea of representativity, has entered into collective bargaining on teachers' living and working conditions separately with the two trade unions representing them, to wit:
   • - the Free Trade Union of Teacher and Researchers of Guinea (SLECG/USTG) in 1993-94; and
   • - the Trade Union Federation of Educators (FSPE/CNTG) from May to September 1995.
2. 334. According to the Government, the negotiations helped to improve general conditions for teachers in the national public service. However, when the negotiations ended, the following issues were shelved until they could be considered in a broader context because of their importance for all public officials:
   • - SLECG: wages and housing;
   • - FSPE: wages and family allowances.
3. 335. The Government explains that when it began negotiations with the FSPE in May 1995, the SLECG immediately declared that it intended to continue its own negotiations on the two issues that had been shelved.
4. 336. The Government goes on to state that it brought the first sectoral negotiations to a close in September 1995 and that, because of a very heavy national schedule, it intended to widen the debate on the issues that had been shelved after the budgetary session of the first multipartite National Assembly which had been scheduled from 5 October to 5 December 1995. It wanted to be able to take account of how all ministerial departments stood in terms of their sectoral policies and budgets.
5. 337. The Government maintains that the backdrop to the negotiations included frequent meetings between the Minister of Labour and all trade union confederations and unions, regardless of their representativity and protocol, and the first sitting of the Advisory Committee on Labour and Social Legislation which brings together four trade union confederations - each with very different political leanings and some more representative than others - provisionally for three years. The Government therefore denies that it refused to negotiate with the unions.
6. 338. The Government gives a chronological account of its recent relations with the SLECG.
7. 339. 22 October 1995: despite the wealth of advice given by the Minister of Labour who herself came up through the unions and is responsible for relations with them, the SLECG requested that negotiations continue with the Ministry of Pre-University Education and Vocational Training. However, the Minister was out of the country on business and the acting Minister replied that he preferred to wait until the Minister came back.
8. 340. 3 November 1995: the Minister of Labour, Social Affairs and Employment received a certified copy of the letter and memorandum sent to the Minister for Pre-University Education and Vocational Training on 1 November 1995, the day she came back from her business trip. She immediately decided to include the issues raised on the agenda of the next sitting of the Advisory Committee on Labour and Social Legislation.
9. 341. 27 November 1995: a new memorandum was sent with a strike notice to the Ministry of Pre-University Education. The Minister had left on business on 24 November. The strike notice, which had been copied and circulated around Guinea and abroad and sent to foreign broadcasting stations, was also sent to the acting Minister for his information, he being responsible for Higher Education, Scientific Research and Culture.
10. 342. 29 November 1995: the Minister of Labour and Higher Education received a SLECG delegation headed by the General Secretary, Mr. Louis M'Bemba Soumah. She recommended that union members respect legal procedures, and specifically the requirement the strike notice be lodged with the Minister for Pre-University Education and Vocational Training, that the strike be for union purposes and that they ensure the broad-based representation of the departments and unions involved in the wage negotiations within the Advisory Committee on Labour and Social Legislation.
11. 343. 7 December 1995: the Minister of Labour, her advisers, the Secretary-General of the Ministry of Higher Education, Scientific Research and Culture and the chief adviser of the Ministry of Pre-University Education and Vocational Training met once again with the SLECG national executive committee, which was assisted by the USTG General Secretary, to confirm the issues that the interministerial meeting was to put on the negotiating table and the specific issues of housing and a permanent base for the National Scientific and Technological Research Directorate. They also agreed:
    • - to request the Ministry of Finance that housing for teachers in the complex run by the National Heritage Directorate be provided on a priority basis;
    • - to begin wage negotiations as soon as possible on the remuneration of all officials, not just teachers, in accordance with the register of grievances filed by the trade union confederations during the May Day celebrations in 1995. It was agreed that wage negotiations would begin on 15 December 1995 with the CNTG and USTG, the only confederations that operated in the public service. Specific issues relating to teachers' conditions would be scheduled for special negotiations with the relevant ministerial departments;
    • - to uphold the spirit of solidarity among unions by accepting inter-union action.
12. 344. 13 December 1995: the SLECG told the Secretary-General of the Ministry of Labour that it wanted to be the only organization directly involved in negotiating teachers' pay, and did not want to be part of the broader-based union participation agreed on 7 December 1995. The Secretary-General replied that the parties had already been invited.
13. 345. 15 December 1995: the opening of the negotiations was postponed until 9 a.m. on 18 December because the USTG delegates did not show up. An SLECG delegation met the Minister of Labour and repeated that it wanted and intended to be the sole negotiator. The Government explained that, because it had already been agreed that broader-based public service pay negotiations would be held with public service trade union confederations, the request could not be granted, not least because the parties concerned had already been invited. However, if the SLECG agreed with its confederation, the USTG, that it could have majority representation, then there was no problem. At around 12. 30 p.m., shortly after the meeting, the SLECG notified the General Labour Inspectorate that it would call a 72-hour general strike across the country from 18 to 20 December, or longer if necessary.
14. 346. 18 December 1995: none of the USTG delegates turned up for the negotiations, so they were postponed once again. The strike received sporadic support. The labour inspection services went around schools in Conakry to see the extent of the strike, and local authorities compiled information from around the country. For the most part, towns were reported to be calm and schools carried on as normal. However, in Conakry there were disturbances in some primary and secondary schools. It was reported, inter alia, that striking teachers disrupted lessons, used threats to clear classrooms or simply prevented people from entering; pupils at some colleges and secondary schools which had become embroiled in the process travelled by various means to other schools where they threw stones and set off firecrackers to force pupils out of their classrooms. This led to material damage and casualties as intruders stormed the schools and greatly upset young children and their parents. The atmosphere was tense and, at the sight of his pupils running away, a primary school headmaster had a heart attack, collapsed and died a few minutes later. In the early afternoon, the USTG replied to the letter inviting it to negotiate, which had been worded in accordance with the terms of the agreements reached and recalled at the meeting on 7 December 1995. The USTG stated its unqualified support for the SLECG's demand to act as sole negotiator and agreed that no other trade union organization should be involved in the planned negotiations. The television news that evening gave a gripping report of the strike, the disrupted lessons, the empty classrooms, the blocked streets, the traffic problems, and broadcast an interview with Mr. Louis M'Bemba Soumah who urged the members of his organization throughout the education system to react strongly to the Government's blocking of the strike.
15. 347. 19 December 1995: the SLECG strike continued. However, calm was restored and schools operated as normal across the country. Negotiations had still not begun because the USTG delegates had not turned up. The Minister of Labour sent another letter inviting the USTG to the negotiations. The Council of Ministers discussed the strike and condemned the attitude of the strikers who in exercising their right to strike had resorted to force to disrupt work in schools and deprived other teachers of their right to work.
16. 348. 20 December 1995: the SLECG strike continued. The Minister of Labour took note of the USTG's patent and persistent refusal to take part in the negotiations and decided that they should begin on 21 December 1995 with the trade union confederations that were on the Advisory Committee on Labour and Social Legislation. An opposition deputy who claimed he was acting on his own initiative went to ask the Minister of Labour about the Government's refusal to negotiate which had caused the strike. He saw that that was not the case and applauded the efforts and understanding of the Government, saying that "it could not give what it did not have". He urged the Minister of Labour and her advisers to do their utmost to secure the release of Mr. Louis M'Bemba Soumah before negotiations began. In the evening, national radio and television broadcast an interview with the Minister of Labour who explained the legal aspects surrounding the strike, its impact on wages, and issues related to the maintenance of law and order. In the interview, she announced that wage negotiations between the Government and the trade union confederations on the Advisory Committee on Labour and Social Legislation would begin on 21 December 1995.
17. 349. 21 December 1995: at 8.15 a.m., the USTG submitted its list of delegates who would take part in the public service wage negotiations. At 9 a.m. the Minister of Labour opened the negotiations. The Government was represented by the Ministers of Finance and the Public Service. The following trade union confederations took part in the meeting: CNTG, ONSLG, UGTG and USTG.
18. 350. With regard to the questioning of Mr. Louis M'Bemba Soumah, General Secretary of the SLECG, the Government states that about 9 a.m. on 19 December 1995, Mr. Ibrahima Fofana, the General Secretary of the USTG, informed the Minister of Labour that the police had questioned Mr. Soumah the previous evening at his home at about 9.30 p.m. The General Secretary asked the Minister of Labour to secure Mr. Soumah's immediate release in order to prevent any bitter and fateful reprisals on the part of his confederation. She replied that her department was going to look into the whys and wherefores of the questioning. In order to promote and protect freedom of association, she promised to make every effort to secure Mr. Soumah's release. In the course of her inquiry, she learned that Mr. Soumah, General Secretary of SLECG, had been questioned in connection with inciting violence, disturbing law and order through unauthorized street blockades which led to fights and injuries, and damaging public school buildings. She continued to work tirelessly with the criminal investigation department and the courts, and on 21 December 1995 the public prosecutor decided to order Mr. Soumah's temporary release. The following day, Mr. Soumah joined the USTG delegation in the public service wage negotiations.
19. 351. The Government concludes its communication with the hope that this highly detailed account would help shed light on its alleged refusal to negotiate with the unions in general and the SLECG in particular. It stressed that its constant policy, which discarded protocol and ensured indiscriminate dialogue and openness with all the social partners, was to recognize and respect the identity of each organization and thus try and ensure that justice, equality and loyalty prevailed. In return, the Government believed that the importance of sectoral negotiations held either simultaneously or successively with various trade union organizations should be recognized. The Government maintained that it showed no bias towards nor excluded any partner in social and economic dialogue and that it tried to improve the substance of dialogue in the best interests of all Guineans and workers. It also maintained that freedom of association was part and parcel of its policy and recalled that ILO Conventions Nos. 87 and 98 had been ratified as early as 1959, during Guinea's first six months of independence. According to the Government, the provisions of the Conventions inspired those of the Constitution and the Labour Code, and every effort was made to publicize them and retain a human element in any administrative, police or security practices that could hinder them. However, the Government believed that, even though the right to strike was recognized, protected and practised, that did not exclude the right of non-striking workers to work normally. The corollary of respect for the right to strike is respect for other people and, inter alia, for law and order whereby no citizen is above the law.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 352. The Committee notes that this case concerns allegations of anti-union repression during a labour dispute in the teaching sector, including arrests and convictions, the transfer of a trade union member and the withholding of wages for people who engaged in strike action.
2. 353. The complainant organization and the Government's version of events tally in some areas but not in others. They both confirm that collecting bargaining took place on a sectoral basis in 1994 and 1995. However, the complainant organization considers that the failure correctly to apply regulations pertaining to teachers, delays in the payment of wages, the breakdown in national scientific research and, particularly, the rising cost of living forced it to demand adjustments to basic wages and the introduction of a minimum guaranteed inter-occupational wage (SMIG), issues that had already been raised in April 1994 in a memorandum that was sent to the Government on 1 November 1995. The USTG explains that on 27 November 1995 notice was issued of a 72-hour general strike across the country from 18 to 20 December 1995, since none of the demands contained in the memorandum of 1 November had been met. The complainant organization acknowledges that the other representative teachers' organization, the FSPE, which is affiliated to the CNTG, refused to go on strike and called on its members to do likewise. The General Secretary of the SLECG, Mr. Soumah, was detained for 48 hours from the day the strike began as well as Mr. Condé. Several strikers were also given a one-year suspended sentence. One trade union member was transferred and the police intervened to disperse the teachers and researchers gathered at the communal meeting.
3. 354. The Government acknowledges that the USTG sent a memorandum containing its demands on 1 November 1995. However, the Government wanted the memorandum and the demands made by the SLECG, which is affiliated to the complainant organization, and by the FSPE, a rival organization, to be considered at a later date by the Advisory Committee on Labour and Social Legislation because the demands had been shelved during previous negotiations. The Government stresses that, after the strike notice was issued, the parties agreed to open wage negotiations on 15 December 1995 which would cover the pay of all public officials, not just teachers, in accordance with the register of grievances submitted by the confederations on 1 May 1995. However, in the meantime the SLECG, which is affiliated to the USTG, had refused to negotiate alongside the rival union. On 15 December 1995 the Government had insisted on respect for the mutual commitment to broader-based negotiations on pay for all public service workers to be attended by SLECG delegates. The Government acknowledges that the strike received sporadic support from 18 December. It maintains that in several establishments strikers used violence to undermine non-strikers' right to work. The Government regrets that, despite its requests, the SLECG refused to take part in negotiations on 19 and 20 December. It states that its negotiations with trade union confederations on the Advisory Committee on Labour and Social Legislation were resumed on 21 December.
4. 355. In the light of the explanations given by the complainant organization and the Government, it appears that the Government did not refuse to negotiate. The difference in opinion basically centred on which trade union organizations should take part in the negotiations. The Committee does not feel that the Government can be blamed for wanting to bring the sector's representative trade union organizations around the negotiating table, whether they took part in the strike or not. Moreover, it seems that the demands centred on issues (including wages) that it had been decided to shelve until broader-based negotiations on the entire public service could be held. Whatever the case may be, it seems that the SLECG ultimately took part in the negotiations since the General Secretary joined the USTG delegation after his release.
5. 356. With regard to the exercise of the right to strike, the Committee notes that no one disputes that the strike was called in accordance with proper procedures. The Committee also notes that the strike was not prohibited. All the same, repressive measures were taken against trade union leaders and strikers. In this regard, the Committee recalls that it has always recognized the right to strike by workers and their organizations as a legitimate means of defending their economic and social interests and that while purely political strikes do not fall within the scope of the principles of freedom of association, trade unions should be able to have recourse to protest strikes, in particular where aimed at criticizing a government's economic and social policies (see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, 4th (revised) edition, 1996, paras. 474, 481 and 482).
6. 357. With regard to the questioning of Mr. Soumah, General Secretary of the SLECG, the Government acknowledges that he was questioned on 18 December. However, the Government explains that, once the Minister of Labour learned of his arrest, she questioned the competent authorities about the circumstances surrounding it. They stated that he had been arrested in connection with inciting violence, disturbing law and order through unauthorized street blockades which led to fights and injuries, and damaging public buildings. Nevertheless, the Minister of Labour went through all the necessary formalities with the criminal investigation department and the courts to secure Mr. Soumah's release. He was released on 21 December 1995 and was able to take part in the public service wage negotiations as head of the USTG delegation.
7. 358. The Committee deeply regrets that the SLECG General Secretary was kept under arrest for three days, from the beginning of the strike until after it had ended. The Government considers that he was questioned in connection with inciting violence, disturbing law and order through unauthorized street blockades which led to fights and injuries, and damaging public buildings. The Committee also notes that, according to the Government, the public prosecutor ordered Mr. Soumah's temporary release, which suggests that legal action may still be taken against him. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information on developments in Mr. Soumah's situation.
8. 359. The Government has confined itself to stating that the strikers used violence to undermine non-strikers' right to work and that acts of violence were carried out and has not commented specifically on the complainants' other allegations, namely the arrest of Mr. Condé, a trade union leader, the police's use of tear gas and truncheons to break up a meeting of teachers and researchers, the one-year suspended sentence for six teachers handed down by the Conakry correctional court, the arrest of teachers Mamadou Cellou Diallo and Mohamed Sankhou, the three-day detention of the SLECG representative in Télimélé, and the transfer to Macenta of the General Secretary of the SLECG trade union in Gueckédéou, Mr. Frantoma Bereta. The Committee expresses its deep concern at these extremely serious allegations and requests the Government to provide its comments and observations in this regard.
9. 360. With regard to the arrest of strikers, the Committee regrets the alleged arrest, detention and conviction of trade unionists in December 1995 and January 1996. It requests the Government to send its observations on this aspect, along with the text of the sentences handed down on the six teachers, state why Mr. Cellou Diallo, Mr. Mohamed Sankhou and the SLECG representative in Télimélé were arrested and provide information on their current situation.
10. 361. With regard to police intervention during the strike, the Committee reminds the Government that the use of police for strike-breaking purposes is an infringement of trade union rights and that the authorities should resort to the use of force only in situations where law and order is seriously threatened (see op. cit., paras. 579 and 580). The Committee therefore requests the Government to arrange for an independent, impartial and in-depth inquiry in order to determine the nature of the police actions and find out who is responsible, and to provide information in this respect.
11. 362. With regard to the transfer of a SLECG leader who, according to the complainant organization, took part in the strike, the Committee recalls that no one should be penalized for carrying out or attempting to carry out a legitimate strike (see op. cit., para 590). The Committee requests the Government to establish whether the allegation is true and to take the necessary steps to ensure that the SLECG leader is reinstated in his post.
12. 363. Finally, with regard to the allegation that wages have been docked for the days the strike took place, the Committee recalls that such deductions give rise to no objection from the point of view of the principle of freedom of association (see op. cit., para 588).

The Committee's recommendations

1. 364. In the light of its foregoing interim conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:
   • (a) Deeply regretting that Mr. Soumah, General Secretary of the SLECG was under arrest throughout the strike, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on developments in his situation.
   • (b) Regretting the arrest, detention and conviction of striking trade union members in December 1995 and January 1996, the Committee requests the Government to send its observations on this aspect, along with the text of the sentences handed down on the six teachers by the court in Conakry on 29 December 1995, state why Mr. Mamadou Cellou Diallo, Mr. Mohamed Sankhou and the SLECG representative in Télimélé were arrested and provide information on their current situation.
   • (c) Recalling that the use of the police for strike-breaking purposes is an infringement of trade union rights and that the authorities should resort to the use of force only in situations where law and order is seriously threatened, the Committee requests the Government to arrange for an independent, impartial and in-depth inquiry in order to determine the nature of the police actions and find out who is responsible, and to keep it informed in this respect.
   • (d) Finally, with regard to the transfer of a trade union leader for having participated in a strike, the Committee requests the Government to establish whether the allegation is true and to take the necessary steps to ensure that the SLECG leader is reinstated in his post.