Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2024, published 113rd ILC session (2025)

Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Algeria (Ratification: 1962)

The Committee notes the observations from the following representative employers’ and workers’ organizations received on: 17 September 2024 from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), 30 August 2024 from the International Organisation of Employers (IOE), 27 August 2024 from the National Autonomous Union of Public Administration Personnel (SNAPAP), 24 August 2024 from the Trade Union Confederation of Productive Workers (COSYFOP) and the National Union of Industrial Workers (SNSI), and 22 August 2024 from the Autonomous National Union of Electricity and Gas Workers (SNATEG). The Committee notes the replies provided in September 2024 by the Government to the observations and examines them below. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information in response to the allegations contained in the observations to which it has not yet provided a response.

Measures against trade union leaders. The Committee previously requested information on several trade union leaders (Mr Kaddour Chouicha, Coordinator of the Higher Education Teachers’ Union (SESS), Mr Fellah Hamoudi, member of the SNAPAP office, and Mr Morad Ghedia, Chairperson of the SNAPAP) who were subjected to judicial harassment, according to the allegations of the trade union organizations. In 2022, the Committee noted the Government’s reply on the grounds for their arrest and conviction and requested information on the outcome of the legal procedures against them. The Committee notes that the Government merely reiterates that it regularly provides information to the various ILO supervisory bodies, including this Committee, the Committee on the Application of Standards of the International Labour Conference and the Committee on Freedom of Association. The Committee observes that the case of Mr Fellah Hamoudi was examined by the Committee on Freedom of Association in the context of a complaint in March 2024 (Case No. 3434) and that on that occasion the Government indicated that Mr Fellah Hamoudi had been arrested and sentenced by the court in Tlemcen to three years in prison and a fine of 300,000 Algerian dinars (US$2,245) for acts punishable under the Criminal Code and the Associations Act of 2012. In the Government’s view, this case does not constitute an obstacle to freedom of association, and Mr Fellah Hamoudi may exercise his right to appeal to the court in Tlemcen. Recalling the seriousness of the alleged offences against trade union leaders, namely harassment, arrest, detention and terrorism convictions, the Committee expects the Government to provide without delay the court decisions convicting the trade union leaders and any information on the follow-up, including any appeals lodged against the decisions in question.

Moreover, the Committee urges the Government to comment on the situation of the members and trade union leaders of the SNAPAP and the General and Autonomous Confederation of Workers in Algeria (CGATA) referred to in the communication received by the Office in August 2023, a copy of which was forwarded to the Government on 6 September 2023.

Lastly, the Committee notes that the communication from COSYFOP contains numerous allegations concerning harassment of its leaders and members. The Committee notes that these allegations were examined by the Committee on Freedom of Association in the context of a complaint. The Committee refers to the conclusions and recommendations made by the Committee on Freedom of Association (see 405th Report of the Committee on Freedom of Association, March 2024, Case No. 3434). The Committee notes that while the Committee on Freedom of Association did not express an opinion on whether the several convictions of trade unions leaders and members mentioned in the complaint represent a violation of freedom of association, it however underlined that the judicial decisions punishing trade union leaders and members are related to the expression of opinions in the exercise of trade union mandates, even if the Government disputes the existence of COSYFOP. Agreeing with the Committee on Freedom of Association that the authorities’ threatening to press criminal charges in response to legitimate opinions of trade union representatives may have an intimidating and detrimental effect on the exercise of trade union rights, the Committee requests the Government to comment regarding the impact of such threats on lawful trade union activities.

Inviolability of trade union premises. With regard to the alleged closure of the premises of the CGATA and COSYFOP, the Committee notes with regret that the Government once again merely bases the administrative decision on what it considers to be the lack of legitimacy of the trade union leaders of COSYFOP and the CGATA and the alleged use of the premises for purposes that are not related to trade union activities. The Government reiterates that those concerned still have not asserted their right to complain to the courts to challenge the closure of headquarters. Noting that the Government does not dispute the closure of these premises by administrative decision, the Committee recalls that searches should only be possible when a warrant has been issued for that purpose by the regular judicial authority, when the latter is satisfied that there is good reason to presume that such a search will produce evidence for criminal proceedings under the ordinary law, and provided the search is restricted to the purpose for which the warrant was issued (see the 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 114). The Committee once again urges the Government to reverse without delay the decisions to close the trade union premises of COSYFOP, the CGATA and the SNAPAP/CGATA taken by the administration without a court warrant.

Legislative issues

Implementation of legislation on the exercise of the right to organize. The Committee previously noted the adoption of Act No. 23-02 of 25 April 2023 on the exercise of the right to organize, and of Act No. 23-08 of 21 June 2023 concerning the prevention and settlement of collective labour disputes and the exercise of the right to strike. It noted that these two Acts amend existing provisions and introduce new provisions which provide clarification on the exercise of freedom of association and protection of the right to organize. It noted, however, that the trade union organizations had made numerous criticisms of Act No. 23-02 and immediately denounced the fact that it had been developed in consultation with a minority of the country’s trade unions.

The Committee examined the Acts in light of the observations of the Government and the trade union organizations and recommended on many points that the Government initiate consultations with the social partners with a view to amending the provisions of the Acts indicating any measures taken in this respect. The Committee notes with concern that the Government merely provides information justifying the adoption of the legislative provisions which are the subject of its comments, without following up on the Committee’s recommendations, with a few exceptions. The Committee is therefore bound to recall below the provisions in respect of which it urges the Government to take without delay the necessary measures, in consultation with representative employers’ and workers’ organizations, with a view to amending them.

Scope of application (section 2 of Act No. 23-02).The Committee urges the Government to consult the social partners, as a matter of urgency, on the measures to be taken to amend the requirements resulting from the application of section 2 of Act No. 23-02, so that trade union office in an enterprise is no longer restricted to persons employed by the enterprisein question, or to remove the requirement to belong to the occupation or to be an employee for at least a reasonable proportion of trade union officials. The Committee recalls that provisions of this type infringe the right of organizations to draw up their constitutions and to elect representatives in full freedom by preventing qualified persons (such as full-time union officers or pensioners) from being elected, or by depriving the organizations of the experience of certain officers when they are unable to provide enough qualified persons from among their own ranks.

Independence of trade union organizations (sections 12 to 15 of Act No. 23-02). The Committee recalls that provisions imposing a general prohibition on political activities by trade unions or employers’ organizations for the promotion of their specific objectives are contrary to the Convention. Accordingly, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to review sections 12 to 15 of Act No. 23-02, in consultation with representative workers’ and employers’ organizations at the national level, with a view to amending them.

Trade union constitutions and rules of procedure (sections 37 to 42 of Act No. 23-02). The Committee recalls that the development of the trade union movement and its wider recognition as a social partner in its own right require workers’ organizations to be able to voice their positions on political issues in the broad sense of the term, and, in particular, to express their views publicly on a government’s economic and social policy. With regard to the political activities of the trade union movement, the Committee has expressed the view that both legislative provisions which establish a close relationship between trade union organizations and political parties, and those which prohibit all political activities by trade unions, give rise to serious difficulties with regard to the principles of the Convention. The Committee therefore recalls that provisions imposing a general prohibition on political activities by trade unions or employers’ organizations for the promotion of their specific objectives are contrary to the Convention. Accordingly, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to review sections 37 to 42 of Act No. 23-02, in consultation with representative employers’ and workers’ organizations at the national level, with a view to amending them.

Gifts and bequests (section 49 of Act No. 23-02). The Committee recalls the need to remove the requirement to obtain prior authorization from the public authorities with regard to gifts and bequests from national trade union organizations or foreign entities. The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 49 of Act No. 23-02.

Term and number of trade union appointments (section 56 of Act No. 23-02). The Committee recalls that the right of workers’ organizations to draw up their own constitutions and rules, organize their administration and formulate their programmes means that matters such as the establishment of the term of appointments must be left to the unions themselves in their constitutions and rules. The Committee considers that provisions regulating in detail the alternation in the leadership of workers’ or employers’ organizations are incompatible with the Convention as they amount to interference by the public authorities in trade union affairs. The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 56 of Act No. 23-02.

Response to requests from the authorities (section 61 of Act No. 23-02). The Committee questions the wording of section 61, which imposes a duty to respond to all requests from the competent administrative authority but does not specify the nature, possible justifications or limits of such requests. Such a general provision poses challenges in that it could allow for continuous or harassing objections from the authorities and thereby give rise to risks of partiality or abuse. While the Government provides explanations for the wording of this section, it nevertheless indicates that, for the sake of clarity, section 61 will be reviewed under the amendment to Act No. 23-02. The Committee urges the Government to delete section 61 of Act No. 23-02 or to initiate consultations with representative workers’ and employers’ organizations in order to amend it.

Dissolution of trade unions (sections 64 to 67 of Act No. 23-02). The Government indicates that it will be able to provide information on the implementation of these legal provisions in its next reports. Recalling that the dissolution of trade unions constitutes an extreme form of interference by the authorities in the activities of organizations, the Committee urges the Government to provide detailed information on the number of administrative appeals seeking the dissolution of trade unions under section 65, the specific grounds for such appeals, and the outcomes.

Procedures for the exercise of the right to strike (sections 41 to 46 of Act No. 23-08). The Committee recalls that strikes relating to the Government’s economic and social policy, including general strikes, are legitimate and therefore should not be regarded as purely political strikes, which are not covered by the principles of the Convention. Trade unions and employers’ organizations responsible for defending socio-economic and occupational interests should be able to use, respectively, strike action or protest action to support their position in the search for solutions to problems posed by major social and economic policies which have a direct impact on their members. Moreover, with regard to so-called “sympathy” strikes, the Committee considers that a general prohibition of this form of strike action could lead to abuse, particularly in the context of globalization characterized by increasing interdependence and the internationalization of production, and that workers should be able to take such action, provided that the initial strike they are supporting is itself lawful (see the 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraphs 124 and 125). The Committee therefore urges the Government to take all the necessary measures to remove the excessive restrictions on the exercise of the right to strike contained in sections 42 and 45 of Act No. 23-08.

The Committee also requested the Government to clarify the concept of strike under section 42, which defines a strike as a collective and concerted stoppage of work “compatible with the activity of the enterprise and the continuity of public services”. In its reply, the Government states that the legislative provision is understood to mean that the strike must be consistent with the requirements of the enterprise’s activity, and also compatible with continuity of the public service insofar as the enterprise may include activities related to the production of essential goods (for example, pharmaceutical products and medical devices during a pandemic). The Committee requests the Government to provide practical examples where a collective stoppage of work has been considered incompatible with the employer’s activity or with the continuity of the public service, pursuant to section 42 of Act No. 23-08, and to indicate any penalties imposed. The Committee also requests the Government to provide any list, drawn up on the basis of practice or by regulation, of jobs considered compatible with the continuity of the public service.

Lastly, the Committee noted that the Act requires that strike action be taken after exhaustion of the dispute settlement procedures provided for under Title II of the Act (sections 5 to 40). The Committee indicated that the established conciliation, mediation and voluntary arbitration procedures, which build on each other, could result in a settlement procedure lasting several months before a strike is called. In this regard, the Committee recalled that it considered, for example, that the imposition of a duration of over 60 working days as a precondition for the exercise of a lawful strike may make the exercise of the right to strike difficult, or even impossible (see the 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 144). The Committee urges the Government to initiate consultations with representative workers’ and employers’ organizations in order to reduce the period of prior dispute settlement procedures provided for in Act No. 23-08.

Requisitioning (section 65 of Act No. 23-08). The Committee recalls that it is desirable to limit powers of requisitioning to cases in which the right to strike may be limited, or even prohibited, namely: (i) in the public service for public servants exercising authority in the name of the State; (ii) in essential services in the strict sense of the term; and (iii) in the case of an acute national or local crisis, and considers that essential services, for the purposes of restricting or prohibiting the right to strike, are only those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population (see 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraphs 151 and 131). The Government indicates that the provisions concerning requisitioning have not yet been used. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any use of section 65 of Act 23-08, in the future.

Strike resolution (section 69 of Act No. 23-08). The Committee requests the Government to remove the provision envisaging the participation of the employer or representative thereof in the general meeting at which it is to be decided whether or not to return to work.

The Committee also notes with concern the observations of trade union organizations on the negative effect of the Act on their ability to develop their activities and its implementation by the authorities, including the labour inspectorate, which is detrimental to independent trade union organizations. The Committee therefore expects the Government to provide detailed information on the measures taken to give effect to its requests for amendments to the legislative framework introduced in 2023 on the exercise of freedom of association, including the right to strike, so as to bring it into conformity with the requirements of the Convention.

Registration of trade union organizations

The Committee recalls that it has been examining the issue of the registration of the Algerian Union of Employees of the Public Administration (SAFAP) and the Confederation of Algerian Trade Unions (CSA) since 2019. Regarding the SAFAP, the Government indicates that it expects the union to amend its constitution in accordance with Act No. 23-02. As to the CSA, the Government indicates that the trade union organization has been invited to amend its constitution in accordance with the new law. However, an examination of the constitution of the CSA, as well as the constitutions of some of the trade union organizations forming it, has revealed issues of conformity, particularly with section 38, which specifies the provisions that must be included in the constitutions of trade union organizations. The administration is still awaiting the conformity of the constitution of the CSA, as well as those of the trade union organizations forming it. The Committee expects the Government to complete processing the registration applications of the SAFAP and the CSA without delay.

Furthermore, the Committee notes the allegations of the National Union of Industrial Workers (SNSI), which denounces the administration’s refusal to register its leadership that was renewed at a general meeting in July 2018. The Committee urges the Government to provide its comments in response to the allegations contained in the communication from the SNSI.

With regard to the situation of SNATEG, the Committee notes that the Committee on Freedom of Association, during its last examination of the complaint (408th Report, October 2024, Case No. 3210), maintained its recommendations requesting the Government to review the decision to dissolve SNATEG without delay, taking due account of the factual evidence outlined, and in accordance with the principles of freedom of association and its international obligations. The Committee notes with concern that the Government merely states that the administration processed the application for the voluntary dissolution of SNATEG without interfering. The Committee is bound to reiterate its expectation that the Government will finally take the necessary measures to give effect to the recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association in this case.

Lastly, the Committee is bound to remind the Government, which challenges the standing of members of COSYFOP (whose registration it contests) and the CGATA (whose registration it refuses) as trade union leaders, that the exercise of legitimate trade union activities should not be dependent on registration and that the authorities should refrain from any interference which would restrict this right or impede its exercise, unless public order is disturbed or its maintenance seriously and imminently endangered. The Committee notes that these organizations once again denounce the administration’s refusal to take measures to register them, despite their requests and willingness to engage in dialogue.

With regard to COSYFOP, the Committee recalls that its situation is before the Committee on Freedom of Association, which has made recommendations firmly urging the Government to make contact with COSYFOP in order to find a way out of the difference of opinion concerning the election of its leaders, in order to facilitate the registration process. The Committee endorses these recommendations (see 405th Report, March 2024, Case No. 3434). The Committee expects the Government to resolve the issue of the registration of COSYFOP, the CGATA and other trade union organizations awaiting registration under the new law without further delay.

In conclusion, the Committee once again urges the Government to further strengthen its efforts to ensure that full freedom of association is effectively guaranteed in law and in practice. Regretting that the Government has not taken any tangible measures despite the extent of the previously raised issues of conformity with the Convention, the Committee expects the Government to hold without further delay consultations with the representative employers’ and workers’ organizations concerned in order to revise the provisions of Acts Nos 23-02 and 23-08 in the light of its comments. The Committee urges the Government to report any progress in this regard.

The Committee reminds the Government that it may avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office, if it so wishes.