Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2002, Publication: 90th ILC session (2002)

Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) (Ratification: 1982)

A Government representative referred to the direct contacts mission from 6 to 10 May this year, the report of which had just been received. He noted the support of this supervisory body and the Committee on Freedom of Association for democracy and fundamental freedoms which his Government, which had been democratically elected, continued to promote despite the failed coup d'état of 11 April 2002. His country had continued to make progress in compliance with international labour standards, as illustrated by the recent ratification of the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169). It was also promoting the freedom of trade unions and employers as an essential instrument of participatory democracy, as set out in the Constitution. For this purpose, the Government had developed a plan of public investment and the training of officials for the defence and promotion of human rights, including freedom of association.

At the legislative level, the Government agreed upon the need to amend sections 404, 408, 409, 418, 419, 637 and 639 of the Basic Labour Act of 1990 in order to bring them into conformity with 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). This legislative reform was being realized with the help and advice of the direct contacts mission. In accordance with the provisions of the Constitution and in view of the growing activism of human rights NGOs and the trade union movement, other provisions would also have to be reformed relating to matters such as the legal status of international labour Conventions, the exercise of the right to strike and the supervisory powers of labour inspectors. A Bill to reform the Basic Labour Act, which provided for the amendment of sections 404, 407, 418, 419, 637 and 639, and the repeal of sections 408 and 409, had just been submitted to the National Assembly and undoubtedly constituted a partial reform, which would be completed subsequently.

The last legislative reform was made in 1997, when those later involved in the coup d'etat of 11 April this year played a star role in changing the law, to flexibilize and deregulate the conditions of work, but never to give effect to the recommendations of the Committee of Experts.

With regard to article 95 in fine of the Constitution, the law should make it possible to develop its content in accordance with Conventions Nos. 87 and 98. A political debate on the direct election of trade union leaders in workers' organizations, in relation to the intervention of the Workers Confederation of Venezuela (CTV), had been initiated. The Government of the time, with the support of the trade union leadership of the CTV, had illegally detained some of its leaders, and had made others disappear, while persecuting workers' leaders, affecting more than 20,000 workers. The above debate had resulted in section 434 of the Basic Labour Act of 1990, which provided that the executive boards of trade unions should discharge their functions for the period set out in their by-laws, but in no case for longer than three years. In view of this experience the Government was amending section 434 in order to set forth the principle of democratic alternation, with the obligation for second- and third-level trade union organizations (federations and confederations) to institute authentically democratic, free and transparent electoral processes.

With regard to trade union officers, he indicated that they should remain subject to self-regulation through the by-laws of trade union organizations. In this respect, section 8 of the by-laws of the CTV restricted the mandates of trade union officers to two consecutive periods, with them automatically leaving office upon completion of the second period. With regard to the functions of the National Electoral Council with regard to trade unions, the Government was bound to respect the independence of the electoral authority. All electoral rules, as well as the technical assistance of the Council, and its intervention as an electoral arbitrator and tribunal, had to be voluntary and freely requested by the trade union organizations. The Government agreed that the general electoral rules could not affect the right of trade union organizations to regulate their internal affairs and could not involve a violation of the right of workers to draw up their own rules. He noted that before approving the Constitution, the CTV had requested the intervention and participation of the National Electoral Council under the terms of the Basic Act respecting political suffrage and participation, which had shown that there was a strong citizens' movement of the workers in the principal trade union organization demanding free and transparent trade union elections.

With regard to the Decree issued by the constituent National Assembly respecting measures to guarantee freedom of association, this was an instrument intended to unify the country's fragmented trade union movement through an electoral process. This objective was not shared by the Government, which supported democratic pluralism and the participation of all social categories. The decree was not applied and had no legal force in practice. There were four trade union confederations, tens of federations and thousands of trade unions with very different ideologies within the country, almost all of which had held elections the previous year. It was therefore unclear which trade union unity the Committee of Experts was referring to.

With reference to the draft texts respecting the protection of trade union guarantees and freedoms and the democratic rights of workers in their unions, federations and confederations, he shared the concern of the Committee of Experts and welcomed the fact that its comments had helped to erode the extreme positions of trade union leaders and politicians who did not wish to gain their respective offices through democratic, transparent and free elections. In accordance with the recommendations of this Committee, the Government would shortly inform the legislative authority of the incompatibility of both draft texts with the obligations deriving from the Convention. The two draft texts, which dealt not only with trade union guarantees and freedoms but also with democratic rights in unions, federations and confederations, were being archived and removed from the agenda of the National Assembly.

On the subject of the requested repeal of resolution No. 01-00-012 of the Office of the Prosecutor of the Republic requiring trade union officials to make a sworn statement of their assets at the beginning and end of their mandate, the Government understood that the objective of this text was to establish guarantees to prevent corruption and the misuse of trade union office for financial rather than social purposes. The same requirement is also to be found in the by-laws of the Venezuela Workers' Confederation. In order to bring the national provisions into closer conformity with the relevant Conventions, a procedure would need to be followed similar to that envisaged in section 442 of the Basic Labour Act, under which the intervention of the Prosecutor of the Republic would occur after all the internal channels of regulation respecting financial matters in the trade union movement had been exhausted.

In conclusion, he reaffirmed his country's commitment to social dialogue and the participation of all categories of society. He welcomed the role played by the Committee in encouraging further institutional changes in his country in defence of human rights, and particularly social, economic and cultural rights, which were so excluded and overlooked in the current process of globalization.

The Worker members stated that this Committee had been discussing the application of Convention No. 87 by Venezuela for a number of years. In 2000, the Worker members of Venezuela had indicated the total absence of progress and of any signs of Government willingness to improve the situation. The case was included into a special paragraph of the Committee's report and a joint letter by the Worker and Employer Vice-Chairpersons was addressed to the President of the Conference. In 2001, this Committee had again expressed serious concern about the absence of tangible progress. The Government then was requested, on one hand, to urgently amend the legislation in order to allow workers and employers to establish organizations of their own choosing and to elect their representatives in full freedom and, on the other hand, to repeal the excessively long and detailed list of duties entrusted to, and aims to be achieved by, these organizations. The Committee also referred to the acts of interference by the authorities into the internal affairs of trade unions, as well as to certain provisions of the Constitution which were not in conformity with the Convention.

A direct contacts mission had visited Venezuela last May, after having been postponed several times. It had observed that the political situation was highly polarized and had noted numerous problems of interference by the authorities, as well as a total absence of social dialogue and consultation of social partners. The Government undertook to submit a draft law answering to the requests of the supervisory bodies. The social situation had deeply deteriorated. Over the past few months, workers had lost their jobs and numerous conflicts in various sectors witnessed their anxiety and discontent. That was why it was appropriate to insist once again on the fundamental role of a social dialogue in order to guarantee a climate of peace and social justice, as well as on the importance of observing freedom of association without interference by public authorities into the trade union activities.

The Employer members observed that the case of Venezuela in relation to the application of Convention No. 87 had been examined by the Conference Committee seven times since 1995. In the last two years, the Conference Committee had placed its conclusions in a special paragraph. Since this was a long-standing case, the Committee of Experts had requested a direct contacts mission to the country to collect information on the application of the Convention and to prepare amendments to ensure its full application. After some hesitation, the Government had received a direct contacts mission, whose report had drawn clear conclusions regarding the situation in the country.

The Employer members stated that all discrepancies in law and practice persisted. The State continued to undermine the rights enshrined in the Convention of both the workers and employers. The Government representative had announced the Government's intention to introduce some changes. The extent of such possible changes was, however, unclear. They further observed that tripartite consultations were never held in the country. There were no representatives of employers and workers on the Commission on Social Dialogue. The Employer members considered it a good sign of social partnership that the employers had refused to participate in the work of the Commission on Social Dialogue, because the workers' union, CTU, had not been included in the Commission. It was regrettable that laws had been adopted recently without prior consultations with the social partners. Further massive violations of the right of freedom of association were based on the new Venezuelan legislation of 1999, e.g. elections of occupational unions were regulated and supervised by the National Electoral Council. The Employer members observed a tendency of favouring unified trade unions.

Referring to resolution No. 01-00-012, the Committee of Experts requested that it be repealed since it required trade union officials to make a sworn statement of assets at the beginning and at the end of their mandate. The Government representative had first defended this resolution and subsequently he had said that amendments to it were possible. This contradictory statement of the Government representative was similar to the previous attitude the Government had shown in this Committee. The Government had appeared prepared for changes, but subsequently it had never taken any action.

In conclusion, the Employer members stated a clear deterioration in developments concerning freedom of association. The draft law mentioned by the Government representative, which had been prepared after the direct contacts mission, went in the opposite direction from safeguarding freedom of association. The Government apparently did not want to understand that it was not the task of the State to issue detailed regulations for organizing the election of occupational unions and associations.

The Worker member of Venezuela stated that he unreservedly supported the request made by the Committee of Experts in its report (of the current year) to modify sections of the Organic Labour Act, concerning the high number of workers required to form a trade union, as well as the excessively long period after which foreign workers could join the executive body of trade unions. He called upon the Government representative, as had been done for over ten years, for the immediate amendment of the Act, to put it into conformity with the Conventions of the ILO. He also called for the modification of the other sections indicated by the Government representative. He thanked the Venezuelan Government for the ratification of the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169), which consolidated the rights enshrined in the new Constitution.

In respect to the electoral process of 2001, between August and October of 2001, elections of 3,000 grass-roots trade unions and 95 federations, as well as three of the four important trade union centres, that is, CTV, CODESA and CGT, had taken place. However, the elections of the executive committee and other bodies of the CTV had been hindered by innumerable irregularities that had led to the resignation of the electoral committee of the CTV and the interruption of the electoral process. It was deplorable that there had still not been a clarification of this process, that had left the sector of workers without just representation, to participate in social dialogue under the best conditions possible. The entire electoral process had been regulated by an agreement signed by the CNE and the CTV. In this way, all trade unions and federations and two centres had been legally constituted by the agreement.

Furthermore, no government had the power to choose to recognize the executive board of the workers. The main obstacle to the recognition of the joint executive board of the CTV was of another nature and was basically due to the fact that: (1) in violation of article 37 of the Electoral Statute of the CTV, the joint executive board was constituted with barely 48 per cent of the total votes, which represented less than 50 per cent of those registered; (2) the composition of the internal electoral committee of the CTV had been unilaterally changed following the finalization of the voting process; and (3) the strategic corporate and trade union sectors of the country (petrol, electricity, transport, iron, aluminium, communications, public services, amongst others) grouped in this confederation, did not recognize the actual executive board of the CTV which had been elected in fraud of the law .

Consequently, the workers were now profoundly divided and did not have a national representation. A low level of unionism persisted, which was inferior to 12 per cent of active workers. The situation was aggravated when last 11 April this trade union sector of the CTV, in alliance with enterprise, political and military sectors, had instigated a coup against the Constitution and legitimate national institutions, with the support of the communication media, particularly television. The speaker profoundly deplored the instrumentalization of the corporate and classist fight of the main trade union confederation to serve political and economic interests of privileged sectors, to destroy popular participation and thereby scorn the rights and interests of workers. He stated the need for an autonomous front against governments, employers and political parties, and deplored that worker representatives who had participated in this Committee last year had participated as ministers in the short-lived de-facto Government which had been installed after the coup. Having come to the Conference was not for polemicizing among workers, employers and the Government, but to strengthen dialogue and social justice.

Finally, the speaker recognized the important role that the ILO played in the process of democratization and requested the Government to send complementary information to the Committee of Experts in the aim of promoting the development of social dialogue, and re-establish the legitimacy of the main Venezuelan trade union, without interference of bodies or institutions outside the trade union movement, following the international standards.

A representative of the ICFTU, after having stated that the previous intervention did not really represent the workers in his country, stated that the report of the direct contacts mission accurately reflected the existing situation in Venezuela with regard to freedom of association. He emphasized that the current regime had repeatedly violated these freedoms, despite the fact that it "had been democratically elected". In fact, today many cases on violations of trade union rights were pending before the Committee on Freedom of Association (Cases Nos. 1952, 2058, 2067, 2160, 2191). Despite this, the Government had authorized the mission to examine only the questions related to the report of the Committee of Experts but not the serious violations of freedom of association. Moreover, more than 90 per cent of the persons interviewed by this mission considered that there existed grave violations of Conventions Nos. 87 and 98. In the same way, there was no social dialogue in the country, and, consequently, no tripartism. The Government had not amended, as had been requested by the Committee of Experts, those articles of the political Constitution that permitted the National Electoral Council to intervene in trade union activities. Moreover, the electoral Bill which was currently being discussed in Parliament was still very interventionist. Finally, the speaker requested that the case of Venezuela be included in a special paragraph.

The Worker member of the United States stated that, unfortunately, nothing in the report of the Committee of Experts or the report of the ILO direct contacts mission indicated that anything had changed in Venezuela regarding non-compliance with Convention No. 87. However, what had changed in the situation in Venezuela was the coup d'état of 12 April of this year. He indicated that at the outset the AFL-CIO and the entire United States labour movement condemned the coup attempt of two months ago. He also pointed out that strikes and demonstrations organized by the Venezuelan trade union movement with other representative organizations in Venezuelan civil society were legitimate expressions of freedom of association that could not and should not be equated with forcible ouster or seizures of power executed by the armed forces.

The Worker member indicated that the Committee of Experts had cited four general instances of how the Venezuelan Organic Labour Act violated Convention No. 87. The Committee of Experts had continued to ask the Government for many years, but without success, to remedy these violations. The Government responded saying the matter would likely be submitted to a national plebiscite. The last time these questions were submitted to a plebiscite the Government was confronted with a 70 per cent abstention as well as with the condemnation on the part of the international labour movement and the ILO. Even though some of the language in the Bolivarian Constitution especially protected freedom of association, it was totally overridden by articles 95 and 293, as was observed by the Committee of Experts and the direct contacts mission. Article 293 gave the National Electoral Council (CNE) the power to effectively dictate the substance and process of internal union governance, in total contradiction with Article 3 of the Convention. Despite these violations of the Convention, the CTV, Venezuela's largest representative labour federation, attempted to advance with its own internal democratization process. The Minister of Labour reported to the direct contacts mission that the CTV voluntarily called on the CNE to conduct their elections. The Worker member indicated the CTV did not have much choice if its internal election process were to be allowed and recognized. Even this attempt to play by the Government's rules was thwarted and on 14 July 2000 the CNE halted the CTV national elections until the following year. The elections were held in October and November 2001 when hundreds of thousands of CTV members voted in 9,100 polling stations throughout the country, and despite this election being found free and fair by independent observers from the Catholic University and the international labour movement, the Venezuelan authorities refused to recognize the CTV Executive on the grounds of alleged irregularities. The ILO direct contacts mission indicated that such recognition should not be denied in the absence of judicial invalidation of the elections. In conclusion, he urged for national reconciliation that was so vital for the survival of the Venezuelan nation, and that required constructive dialogue and recognition between the tripartite partners. Given the gravity of this case, he joined those who called for a special paragraph to be adopted in the Committee's report.

The Worker member of Swaziland supported the statement made by the Worker members. The Government of Venezuela had, 20 years ago, voluntarily ratified Convention No. 87 and had a particular duty and obligation to apply both in law and practice the provisions of the Convention. The universality of the Convention provided a benchmark and it was important that provisions of national legislation and national practice should conform with the Convention and not vice versa. Article 8, paragraph 2, of the Convention provided that national laws should not impede the exercise of the rights enshrined in the Convention. Article 3, paragraph 2, of the Convention provided that public authorities should refrain from interference that would restrict the lawful exercise of this right. Social dialogue was important and should be encouraged. Having ratified the Convention, the Government should realize that compliance was not negotiable but an obligation undertaken 20 years ago. He called for the amendment of the constitutional provisions that were incompatible with the Convention, as recommended by the Committee of Experts.

The Worker member of Cuba stated that he did not consider it very appropriate to include Venezuela in a special paragraph, before having exhausted all the available means of dialogue for resolving the conflict and the difficulties in the application of Convention No. 87. The employers played a key role in this process and he trusted that social dialogue would facilitate the implementation of the observations of the Committee of Experts in national law in favour of the workers as well as the trade union movement, including at the international level. The restrictions of the exercise of liberties were not the principal feature of the Government of Venezuela, quite the contrary. Since it came into power, it had been attacked to an incredible degree, in spite of the fact that it maintained dialogue and offered great hopes to the workers of Latin America.

The Worker member of Chile stated that according to the Committee of Experts and the report of the direct contacts mission, the situation in Venezuela remained generally worrying. Indeed, Convention No. 87 required that workers themselves, without interference of the employers and governments, freely choose the manner in which they organize, function and conduct elections. In this respect, various provisions in the national legislation continued to contradict freedom of association, such as those which required an excessively high quorum to establish trade unions and an exhaustive list of duties and aims of the trade unions to be laid down. Furthermore, trade union unity imposed by law was also contrary to the Convention because it had to be decided upon by the workers themselves. The Government of Venezuela had good knowledge of all these facts, highlighted by the Committee of Experts and the direct contacts mission which had recently visited the country. In the face of the incompatibility between the national legislation and Convention No. 87 ratified by this country 20 years ago, it was necessary that the legal provisions concerned be revoked or modified.

The speaker stressed that the highest Venezuelan authorities had interfered in the activities and functioning of the Confederation of Workers of Venezuela (CTV) by not recognizing its executive board and trying to put pressure on its leaders, which was absolutely contrary to Convention No. 87. In effect, according to the Convention, the workers' right to establish an organization of their own choosing and to elect their leaders in full freedom should be protected. The speaker stated that he was aware of the situation of Venezuelan workers, which was analogous to that in Chile in 1973, when the Chilean Government interfered in the trade union affairs by nominating their leaders.

The speaker therefore urged the Government of Venezuela to introduce all the legislative amendments required by the Committee of Experts in order to ensure that trade union leaders could be nominated without interference by the authorities and employers and that trade unions could organize their administration and activities in full freedom. Finally, the speaker stated that his country had recently carried out a labour law reform which provided for all the abovementioned rights.

The Worker member of India insisted that the Government of Venezuela should not be allowed to act against the provisions of Convention No. 87 which it had ratified in 1982 by invoking the argument that it had to respect its own Constitution. While he wanted the Government to respect its own Constitution, it should not be at the cost of its respect for the ILO's core Convention No. 87. If its Constitution authorized it to interfere in the legitimate and rightful functioning of trade unions, the Government should duly amend the Constitution. The Committee had already indicated that the referendum evoked by the Government was a violation of trade union rights, and more particularly of Article 3 of Convention No. 87. Indian workers, in solidarity with the struggle of the Venezuelan workers, wished to call upon the Government of Venezuela to comply with the conclusions of this Committee and take the necessary steps to bring the country's legislation and practice into line with Convention No. 87. He supported the CTV's action aimed at securing the abrogation of the laws that were incompatible with freedom of association. He called upon the ILO to continue putting pressure on the Government to stop interfering in trade union organizations and to ensure that it fully respected the results of trade union elections.

The Government member of the United States stated that, over the years, the Committee of Experts had noted a number of legislative and constitutional provisions that were not in line with the provisions of Convention No. 87. When that Committee had discussed the case last year, the Government of Venezuela had indicated that it would accept an ILO direct contacts mission. He welcomed the fact that the mission had taken place and that the report was available. He hoped that with the help of the ILO, and on the basis of enhanced tripartite dialogue, the necessary amendments would be achieved. As noted by the Government representative of Venezuela and other speakers, the right of workers' and employers' organizations to organize and conduct their activities without government interference was central to the principle of freedom of association. This applied in particular to the manner in which those organizations elected their officers. He indicated that trade union unity should, in all cases, be the prerogative of the workers themselves, and not imposed by law. He hoped that this would be the focus of the amendment process.

The Government member of Sweden, speaking on behalf of the Governments of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden, noted with deep concern that this case had been examined on several occasions in this Committee without much progress being seen. Referring to the serious discrepancies between the national legislation and the requirements of the Convention, she urged the Government to take the necessary action to amend the national legislation to ensure the rights of workers and employers to establish organizations and to freely decide the regulations on their election procedures and arrangements, without any interference by public authorities. She noted with interest that the Government had accepted a visit of an ILO direct contacts mission and she also noted the report of this mission. She expected that the cooperation with this mission and the Office would help the Government to bring its national legislation and practice into conformity with the provisions and requirements of the Convention. She stressed the importance of implementing the legislation in practice, and encouraged the Government to fully comply with the requests made by the Committee of Experts and the direct contacts mission as soon as possible and to submit a time frame indicating when the necessary amendments would be adopted.

The Employer member of Venezuela thanked the Worker member of Cuba for his intervention and indicated, in reply to the Government representative of Venezuela, that in this country there had been not a coup d'état, but a vacuum of power due to the resignation of the President of the Republic. Regarding a manifestation which took place in Caracas on that occasion, the speaker indicated that a million persons had taken part in it. He also pointed out that his country had ratified Convention No. 169 and the Government had submitted a draft labour law applicable in this case without consultations with employers, which was contrary to the Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144). On behalf of the FEDECAMARAS, he added that it was necessary to give effect to the principle according to which the rights of employers' and workers' organizations might be exercised only in a climate free of violence, and this should be guaranteed by the Government. Finally, the speaker endorsed a proposal to include Venezuela into a special paragraph and expressed the hope that the recommendations of the direct contacts mission would be complied with.

The Government member of the Dominican Republic stated that the social dialogue promoted by the ILO was an ideal way to come to an understanding and he hoped that the technical assistance of the ILO would facilitate reconciliation among the three parties. According to a famous verse: "there is a time for everything under the sun. There is a time to destroy and a time to build. There is a time to wage war and a time to make peace". The moment had arrived for the workers, employers and the Government to achieve an understanding through social consultation.

The Government representative indicated that a number of issues addressed during the discussion required clarification. With regard to the alleged intervention of the National Electoral Council in the election process of workers' organizations, he indicated that the by-laws of the Venezuelan Workers' Confederation (CTV), as amended in 1999 and which were currently in force, provided for a universal, direct and secret ballot for the election of trade union leaders. According to the by-laws, the first general trade union elections were to be held in October 1999 and would be afforded the technical and logistical assistance of the National Electoral Council. Before the elections, there would be a process of trade union unity and of the promotion of the reunification of workers' organizations, thereby openly combating the so-called trade union parallelism. He emphasized that the by-laws of the CTV had been prepared before the constitutional reform process which had resulted in the new Constitution adopted in December 1999. Nevertheless, the trade union election process had been postponed until 2000. In view of the delay in holding trade union elections, an open popular referendum had been held in December 2000 which had been open to the criticism in that, with a view to increasing participation, it had involved persons other than workers who were members of trade union organizations. In March 2001, the trade union organizations had drafted the main lines of the Electoral Charter. Finally, with the financial and logistical support of the National Electoral Council, as requested by the workers' organization, trade union elections had been held from July to November 2001 and had constituted a democratic festival with the broad participation of workers and had resulted in a deep-rooted renovation of the trade union leadership.

With regard to the alleged non-recognition of the CTV by the Government, he maintained that the Government recognized the CTV as the most representative trade union organization in the country and affirmed his recognition and consideration for the organization. However, he indicated that the current members of the Executive Committee of the CTV were currently under challenge by various affiliated workers' organizations. The rules in his country provided for a legal system for the public registration of trade union organizations by the Ministry of Labour. This legal system corresponds to sections 425, 430 and 589 of the Basic Labour Law of 1990, which in fact goes back to 1937. He added that, following the visit by the ILO direct contacts mission, his Government, with a view to complying with the recommendations of the mission in terms of accrediting the Worker representative to the 90th International Labour Conference, had managed to find a solution outside the National Electoral Council. In view of the absence of entries in the corresponding file for the CTV, the Government had referred the matter to the Supreme Court of Justice for endorsement of the representative nature of the CTV, without deciding upon the substance of the issue with regard to the electoral process which had still not been completed. The Court had determined that, as Mr. Ortega appeared to be President of the organization, he should be accredited as a delegate to the International Labour Conference. The Government had complied with this finding. The last entries in the file of the CTV refer to Messrs. Ramírez León and Urbieta, and there is no entry relating to Mr. Ortega. The last entry registered in the file dates from 9 January 2001.

With regard to the alleged violations of freedom of association in Venezuela, he indicated that the very constitution of his country's delegation to the Conference, which included persons against whom there existed some proof of their participation in the coup d'état of last April, was a clear indication of his Government's commitment to the process of rebuilding dialogue. He point out in this regard that his Government's respect for the principles of freedom of association and collective bargaining was evident from the fact that members involved in the failed coup d'état were included in both the Employers' and Workers' delegations. He added that his Government planned to undertake a serious reform of the Basic Labour Act to bring its provisions into compliance with Conventions Nos. 87 and 98, and that this reform enjoyed the support, not only of the Government, but also of the National Assembly, and had been prepared with ILO technical assistance. Both the Government and the National Assembly rejected any system of imposed trade union monopoly. He emphasized that the National Electoral Council had to discharge its functions within the limits of respect for the independence and freedom of trade unions. The Government would work alongside the General Inspectorate of the Republic to repeal the decision respecting the declaration under oath of the assets of trade union leaders. Finally, he undertook to work for the strengthening and deepening of sincere and broad social dialogue with all the social partners.

The Employer members observed that the debate of this year was following similar lines to that of the previous year, as illustrated by the statement of the Government representative. The latter had quoted extensively from the by-laws of a trade union in order to prove that State interference was the fault of the union. Only at the end had he admitted that the Constitution contained provisions empowering the State to interfere in trade union matters. This attitude betrayed a lack of willingness to collaborate with the ILO. The Employer members recalled that for many years changes had been required in law and practice. They also noted that the Government representative had distributed documents to the members of the Committee intended as a type of counter-propaganda in defence of its policy, even though such distribution was counter to the practice of the Committee, the sessions of which were not public. Moreover, the promises that had been made by Government representatives over recent years were far too vague.

In conclusion, they called upon the Committee to recall in its conclusions the violations in the country of the right to freedom of association, with particular reference to state interference in the internal affairs of trade unions and employers' organizations.

The Worker members recalled that the situation of trade unionists in Venezuela was very difficult. They expressed their disappointment that the Minister of Labour had left the room before the end of the discussion. The principal issue of this case was the interference of the authorities in the functioning of trade unions, in violation of Article 3 of Convention No. 87. They requested the Government to amend its legislation in order to bring it into conformity with the provisions of the Convention. Social dialogue played a fundamental role in ensuring a climate of democracy, peace and social justice. Practical measures needed to be taken to give effect to freedom of association in all circumstances. Taking into account the gravity of the case, and in order to support the call for true social dialogue, the conclusions of the Committee should be placed in a special paragraph.

The Government representative expressed his disagreement with the Committee's conclusions since, as indicated in his previous intervention, the Government had initiated a legislative reform process and would not support any draft law imposing trade union unity or the draft laws on trade union freedoms and guarantees and on democratic rights of workers in trade unions, federations and confederations which contained provisions that had been the subject of comments by the Committee of Experts. He added that these measures revealed a sincere willingness to make progress and considered that the situation did not justify the inclusion of this case in a special paragraph.

The Worker member of Cuba reaffirming his proposal made before the adoption of the conclusions, expressed disagreement with the inclusion of the Committee's conclusions on this case in a special paragraph of its report.

The Committee took note of the statement made by the Government representative and of the discussion which ensued. It also noted that a direct contacts mission went to Venezuela in May 2002 and it took note of the conclusions of the mission report. The Committee pointed out that the Committee of Experts had been making comments for many years concerning serious violations of the Convention. These important problems in application concerned, in particular, the right of workers and of employers to form organizations of their own choosing, as set forth in Article 2 of the Convention, the right of these organizations to elect their representatives in full freedom and their right to draw up their rules, as provided in Article 3. The Committee also observed with deep concern that, according to the report of the ILO mission, the authorities did not recognize the executive board of the Venezuelan Workers' Confederation (CTV) and that, as a result, there was no meaningful consultation with the social partners on the subjects that concerned them. Moreover, the Committee deplored that allegations of acts of violence committed with Government backing had been presented to the ILO mission by workers' and employers' organizations. The Committee took note of the will expressed by the Government and the National Assembly to adjust the legislation to the requirements of the Convention and that a draft concerning some aspects of the Committee of Experts' comments had been prepared. The Committee made an urgent appeal to the Government to commence without delay an in-depth dialogue with all social partners without exclusion so that solutions could be found in the very near future to the serious problems of application of the Convention. Recalling that respect for civil liberties was essential to the exercise of trade union rights, the Committee urged the Government to take the necessary measures immediately so that workers' and employers' organizations could fully exercise their rights recognized by the Convention in a climate of complete security. The Committee requested the Government to furnish a detailed report, including the texts of any new draft elaborated, so that the Committee of Experts could examine the situation once again at its next meeting. The Committee decided that its conclusions would be included in a special paragraph of its report. It also decided to mention this case as a case of continued failure to apply the Convention.

The Government representative expressed his disagreement with the Committee's conclusions since, as indicated in his previous intervention, the Government had initiated a legislative reform process and would not support any draft law imposing trade union unity or the draft laws on trade union freedoms and guarantees and on democratic rights of workers in trade unions, federations and confederations which contained provisions that had been the subject of comments by the Committee of Experts. He added that these measures revealed a sincere willingness to make progress and considered that the situation did not justify the inclusion of this case in a special paragraph.

The Worker member of Cuba reaffirming his proposal made before the adoption of the conclusions, expressed disagreement with the inclusion of the Committee's conclusions on this case in a special paragraph of its report.