Afficher en : Francais - Espagnol
- 106. By a communication dated 11 August 1965 the International Federation of Christian Trade Unions (I.F.C.T.U.) presented a complaint against the Government of Colombia alleging infringement of freedom of association. Following transmission of this communication to the Government, the latter furnished its observations by a communication dated 31 August 1965. In a further communication, dated 14 September 1965, the complainant organisation submitted additional information in support of its complaint. At its 41st Session (November 1965) the Committee decided to adjourn examination of the case, since it had not received the Government's observations on the new information supplied by the complainants.
- 107. Colombia has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), or the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).
A. A. The complainants' allegations
A. A. The complainants' allegations
- Allegations concerning the Detention of Trade Union Leaders in Trade Union Premises
- 108 In its original complaint, dated 11 August 1965, I.F.C.T.U stated that the premises of the Antioquia Trade Union Organisation (A.S.A.), at Medellin, had been besieged, and that a certain number of Christian trade union leaders had been detained there. The urgent intervention of the I.L.O was requested in order to ensure that freedom of association would be respected and the trade unionists thus detained might be released. In its subsequent communication, dated 14 September 1965, the complainant organisation explained that, during a meeting at the A.S.A. premises, a police officer accompanied by four policemen, one of whom was carrying a sub-machine gun, had broken into the premises. I.F.C.T.U further stated that the first reaction of the persons present was to try to force the police to leave and that once calm was restored the A.S.A. leaders asked the members of the public to return home; a quarter-of-an-hour later, when there were still 37 persons present on the premises, the police returned, this time heavily armed. According to the complainants' account, the persons present shut the main door, whereupon the police threw a cordon round the premises from 11 p.m. on 9 August 1965 until the afternoon of 10 August. I.F.C.T.U appended to this communication a list of the 37 persons referred to, in which the functions of 11 persons are stated as trade union leaders, the rest including representatives of various liberal professions, journalists, student leaders, students and others.
- 109 In reply to the original complaint the Government states that the detention of persons at the Medellin premises of A.S.A. was carried out on the grounds that, although the country was in a state of emergency and under martial law, it was planned to hold a political and not a trade union meeting at the said premises, with irrefutable intent to promote public agitation. The Government adds that the authorities therefore found themselves obliged, in fulfilment of their legal mandate, to dissolve the meeting and take action against its organisers.
- 110 In a considerable number of cases the Committee has pointed Out that the right of trade unions to meet freely on their own premises, without need for prior authorisation and without supervision by the public authorities, constitutes a fundamental element in freedom of association.
- 111 In the present case the Committee observes that neither in the original complaint nor in the communication in which the complainants submitted additional information is it clearly established that the meeting in question was of a trade union character. The additional information states that, although 11 of the 37 persons detained on the premises were trade union leaders, the others included representatives of various liberal professions, as well as journalists, student leaders, students and other persons engaged in various activities whose connection with the trade union is not explained in the complaint. The complainants do not clarify the reasons for holding the meeting or the subjects discussed there, and the Government asserts that the meeting was of a political and not a trade union character.
- 112 While noting the Government's statements, the Committee recalls that in numerous cases where complaints have been submitted alleging violation Of freedom of association under a state of emergency or under legislation concerning national security, the Committee, while pointing out that it is not competent to state its views on the necessity and desirability of such legislation-a matter coming entirely within the political sphere-has always maintained the view that it should examine the possible repercussions of such legislation on trade union rights.
- 113 Nevertheless, in view of the fact that it is difficult to conclude on the basis of the information supplied that the meeting to which the complaint refers was a trade union meeting, having specifically trade union purposes, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to decide that this aspect of the case does not call for further examination.
- Allegations concerning Intervention by the Authorities in Trade Union Meetings
- 114 In its communication of 14 September 1965 I.F.C.T.U also alleges that the events to which it refers are only one element among the police measures adopted by the Government in its aim of preventing the free development of the trade union movement and that there are very few trade union meetings in Colombia that can be held without the presence of government secret agents.
- 115 Since the Government's observations on this allegation are still awaited, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to request the Government to furnish its observations as soon as possible and in the meantime to adjourn further examination of this aspect of the case.
The Committee's recommendations
The Committee's recommendations
- 116. With regard to the case as a whole the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
- (a) with regard to the allegations relating to the detention of trade union leaders on trade union premises, to decide, for the reasons stated under paragraph 113 above, that this aspect of the case does not call for further examination;
- (b) with regard to the allegation concerning intervention by the authorities on trade union meetings referred to in paragraph 114 to request the Government to be good enough to furnish its observations on this aspect of the case as soon as possible;
- (c) to take note of the present interim report, it being understood that the Committee will submit a further report following receipt of the observations to be requested from the Government under subparagraph (b) above.
- Geneva, 21 February 1966. (Signed) Roberto AGO, Chairman.
