Caso individual (CAS) - Discusión: 2007, Publicación: 96ª reunión CIT (2007)

Convenio sobre la libertad sindical y la protección del derecho de sindicación, 1948 (núm. 87) - Zimbabwe (Ratificación : 2003)

The Chairperson informed members of the Committee that the Director of the International Labour Standards Department had received that very afternoon when the Government was due to appear before the Committee, a letter from the Minister of Public Service, Labour and Social Welfare, Mr Goche, as follows:

Following the listing of the Zimbabwe Government this year, as on the previous five occasions, I wish to inform you that the government has determined not to appear before you this year because of the following:

The Committee of Experts does not appear to be raising any new issues, rather, it repeats the same charges to which we have comprehensively responded over the previous appearances. Given the foregoing, it is now the determination of the Zimbabwe government no longer to be an accomplice to the abuse of this august mechanism of the Committee on the Application of Standards of the ILC. Government remains ready to engage with the ILO Office and any other groups who seek to ameliorate the conditions of the worker in Zimbabwe, anywhere and at anytime, in good faith.

The submission by the government of Zimbabwe in D.10, appearing before the Committee of Standards dismisses the political consideration of Zimbabwe's issues during the previous appearances. This was a fair response to the issues raised by the Committee of Experts with respect to the technical issues as raised but was never an indication of our intent to appear before the Committee of Standards.

The set-piece of the Committee on Application of Standards does not appear to serve the cherished goals we have outlined above.

The Chairperson, after having discussed with the two Vice-Chairpersons, considered that there was sufficient information to hold a discussion on the case. Nevertheless, together with the two Vice-Chairpersons, they decided to close the debate and mention this case in a special paragraph of the report of the Committee and hold a debate on the case in a plenary session of the Conference.

The Employer members said that the situation created by the Government of Zimbabwe's position was highly regrettable, insulting to the Committee and to the ILO supervisory system as a whole. Only the previous day, the Committee had accepted to reschedule the Government's presentation in spite of the fact that the Government had been aware since 15 May 2007 that it was on the list of countries likely to be called to appear before the Committee. In addition, the Employer members noted that the Government had communicated information in document D.10 that it had prepared for the discussion of the case. The Employer members recalled that the Committee could, as it had done with the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 2005, discuss the case on the basis of document D.10. The discussion would be reflected in Part II of the Committee report and, in keeping with the practice followed in the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the case would also feature in a special paragraph in Part I of the Committee's report.

The Employer members recalled that the Committee was required, in the present case, to examine two of the fundamental elements required to ensure the exercise of freedom of association as defined in the Convention, i.e. first, that civil and political liberties were protected effectively. Based on information available to the Committee, union leaders in Zimbabwe were victims of torture, harassment, arrests and police violence. The second element necessary to the exercise of freedom of association was freedom of speech. This also seemed to be lacking in the Zimbabwean situation if the number of arrests carried out on the basis of the Public Order and Security Act (POSA) were taken into account. In order for these conditions to be fulfilled, freedom of association required above all else the existence of the right to freedom and personal security, freedom of movement, freedom of the right to organize and to free speech. These rights could not be restricted to purely trade union issues. The Employer members judged the situation in Zimbabwe to be especially serious.

The Worker members addressed certain broad attacks made by the Government of Zimbabwe in document D.10 before going to the substance of the discussion. Firstly, coming before the Conference Committee was due to the Government having violated the Convention which it had voluntarily ratified in 2003 through no colonial influence but under the leadership of President Mugabe. Secondly, they reminded the Government that the Committee of Experts' report had nothing remotely colonial or partisan that related or even intimated a political agenda aimed at changing the regime and that such a view was a product of a fertile imagination and desperate attempt to divert focus from the real issue which related to the effective application of the Convention in Zimbabwe. Therefore the Worker members were convinced that the arguments raised in document D.10 were misplaced, misdirected, irrelevant and unfortunate. They stated that the Government of Zimbabwe was in the premier league of serial and pathological offenders who flagrantly, persistently and systematically denied the people of Zimbabwe the freedom to exercise their fundamental rights, including their right to freedom of association as enshrined in the Convention. The attitude of the Government constituted total defiance, flagrant disregard of the entire ILO supervisory machinery and was a complete travesty of justice, and indeed was very regrettable and should not be allowed to prevail without reprimand.

The Worker members recalled that, on Monday, 4 June 2007, the Government had voluntarily signed in to appear before the Committee on Wednesday, 6 June 2007, in the afternoon and had been scheduled accordingly; it had then asked for a postponement on Wednesday afternoon, even after having communicated its position in document D.10 - which was not stated in diplomatic language - and had finally decided to boycott its appearance before the Committee, at the 11th hour. This arrogant attitude demonstrated that, on the ground, workers and the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) members in particular, were given even worse treatment. As this was a case of repeated failure to cooperate with the ILO, continued violation of the Convention and, further, as the situation on the ground demonstrated escalated repression, violence and brute force against workers and ZCTU leadership, in particular, the Worker members appealed to the members of the Committee to ensure that the conclusions of the discussion be stated in a special paragraph. The Worker members indicated that a number of Government representatives were present in the room observing the proceedings, who he identified by name. In conclusion, they cited one of Martin Luther King Junior quotes where he stated that there comes a time when a man-made law becomes incongruent with the dictates of social justice and human dignity, and noted that the quote reflected perfectly the situation currently prevailing in Zimbabwe.

The Worker member of Zimbabwe stated that, contrary to the assertions contained in the written information provided by the Government, the principles governing freedom of association continued to be violated every day in Zimbabwe in practice. Referring to the Public Order and Security Act (POSA), he emphasized that, although the provisions of the Act did not apply to the activities of workers' and employers' organizations in principle, the situation was totally different in practice. His organization, the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU), was systematically obliged to obtain prior authorization from the police to go on strike or to hold meetings. That was a sine qua non condition and the police attended those meetings without any restriction. He read out to the Committee an extract of a letter by the police, in reply to a communication by the ZCTU indicating its desire to organize a trade union meeting. With respect to the accusations made by the Government contained in the written information provided claiming that individuals in the ZCTU were politicians and not true trade unionists, which would justify the strong-handed intervention of the police under the POSA, he reminded the Conference that when the old leaders of the ZCTU had decided in 1999 to set up an opposition political party (the MDC), the ZCTU members who had met in extraordinary congresses had immediately adopted a resolution which stated that the union would continue to be independent from any political party and guided by the principles contained in the Resolution concerning the independence of the trade union movement adopted by the International Labour Conference in 1952. In that regard, he stressed that the ZCTU did have members belonging to the MDC, but also members who belonged to the party in power. The exercise of freedom of association in Zimbabwe was rendered difficult because the Government considered that all questions raised by the trade union movement were a priori political, and thereby fell under the scope of the POSA. In those conditions, the independent trade union movement in Zimbabwe could not engage in legitimate and lawful activities to defend the interests of their members because all trade union activity was incriminated in principle. The ZCTU members were of the view that trade unionists belonged to the human species, like any other social category and, as such, they had the right to enjoy their civil and political rights, like any other citizen. Indeed, as reiterated on numerous occasions by the supervisory bodies of the ILO, the absence of those freedoms negated the very meaning of trade union rights.

He reminded the Conference Committee of the visit to Zimbabwe of the Director of the International Labour Standards Department in August 2006, when she had met all the social partners and noted that the lack of social dialogue in the country was the source of numerous problems. For that reason, she commended them to sign the tripartite Kadoma Declaration, entitled "Towards a shared national economic and social vision", a declaration adopted in 2001 by the three social partners as a first step towards remedying the mutual and profound mistrust which prevailed among the tripartite constituents of the country. Finally, he concluded his statement by reiterating that it was very risky to be a trade unionist in Zimbabwe.

The Worker members fully supported the statement of the Worker member of Zimbabwe, indicating that the situation of trade unionists in Zimbabwe was extremely dangerous. In this respect, they emphasized the fact that the trade unionists present at this Conference were in great danger and called on the ILO to ensure their safe journey home.