Suites données aux recommandations du comité et du Conseil d’administration - Rapport No. 331, Juin 2003

Cas no 1937 (Zimbabwe) - Date de la plainte: 09-SEPT.-97 - Clos

Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body

1. 102. The Committee last examined these cases at its March 2002 meeting. As regards Case No. 1937, it requested the Government to transmit a copy of the Labour Amendment Bill so that it could examine the Bill’s conformity with freedom of association principles and previous recommendations concerning the Labour Relations Act [see 327th Report, paras. 130-132]. As regards Case No. 2027, it once again requested the Government to: (1) take the necessary measures to institute an independent investigation into the assault on Mr. Morgan Tsavangirai; (2) take the necessary measures to institute an independent investigation into the arson of the ZCTU offices; (3) keep it informed of any progress made in the amendments to the Labour Relations Act; and (4) keep it informed of any further information it may receive concerning the ZCTU case before the High Court [see 327th Report, paras. 133-135] .
2. 103. In a communication dated 10 February 2003, the Government stated that the Labour Amendment Bill, including amendments, was passed by Parliament on 18 December 2002 and will come into force with the President’s assent. A copy of the Bill has been transmitted to the Office. In addition, more specifically concerning Case No. 2027, the Government reiterates its position in respect of the assault on Mr. Morgan Tsavangirai. It reaffirms that it would set a wrong precedent to set up a judiciary inquiry over a case which was competently handled by the courts of law. As concerns the arson of the ZCTU offices, the Government mentions that no information about the arrest of the perpetrators has been received.
3. 104. The Committee takes note of this information. It notes with interest the amendments made to sections 98, 99 and 100 of the Labour Relations Act, which had granted broad powers to the labour authority to refer disputes to compulsory arbitration. It also notes that the definition of “unlawful collective job action” was not amended as proposed in the former Labour Relations Amendment Bill of 1999. However, some problems remain in the present version of the Bill. Firstly, the various definitions given to the term “unlawful collective job action” may raise difficulty in respect of the right to strike which should not be limited to industrial disputes that are likely to be resolved through the signing of a collective agreement. The Committee recalls that the occupational and economic interests which workers defend through the exercise of the right to strike do not only concern better working conditions or collective claims of an occupational nature, but also the seeking of solutions to economic and social policy questions and problems facing the undertaking which are of direct concern to the workers [see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, 4th edition, 1996, para. 479]. It requests the Government to indicate the manner in which, under current law, it is ensured that industrial action may be taken in respect of questions of economic and social policy without sanctions.
4. 105. Secondly, the Committee notes that, in the case of unlawful collective job action being organized as strictly defined in the Bill, excessive sanctions are provided. Sections 109 and 112 establish possible imprisonment of the individual engaged in an unlawful collective job action, while section 107 gives the power to the Labour Court to dismiss the individual engaged in such action and to suspend or rescind the registration of the trade union involved in such action. In respect of the sanctions of imprisonment, the Committee must recall that all penalties in respect of illegitimate actions linked to strikes should be proportionate to the offence or fault committed and the authorities should not have recourse to measures of imprisonment for the mere fact of organizing or participating in a peaceful strike [see Digest, op. cit., para. 599]. Furthermore, concerning the sanctions of dismissal and dissolution, it recalls that no one should be penalized for carrying out or attempting to carry out a legitimate strike [see Digest, op. cit., para. 590] and that, in any case, the sanctions imposed should not be disproportionate to the seriousness of the violations [see General Survey of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, 81st Session, 1994, para. 178]. Therefore, the Committee requests the Government to amend the Labour Amendment Bill so as to bring it into conformity with freedom of association principles on this point.
5. 106. The Committee takes note of the information related to the assault on Mr. Morgan Tsavangirai. Once again it expresses its deep regret that the Government maintains its previous position concerning that case. It recalls that the case would not appear to have been “completely handled by the courts” as the Government in the past has only referred to the acquittal of an alleged assailant. The Committee emphasizes that the absence of judgements against the guilty parties creates a situation of impunity which reinforces the climate of violence [see Digest, op. cit., para. 55]. Such climate aimed at trade union leaders and their families is not favourable to the free exercise of trade union rights and all States have the duty to guarantee their respect [see Digest, op. cit., paras. 55 and 61]. The Committee therefore urges the Government to ensure that an independent investigation is fully carried to its term with the aim of identifying and punishing the guilty parties. The Committee also requests the Government to keep it informed of developments concerning the investigation into the arson of the ZCTU offices. Finally, the Committee once again requests the Government to keep it informed of the judgement of the High Court concerning the temporary ban on industrial action issued in November 1998.