Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2024, Publicación: 113ª reunión CIT (2025)

Convenio sobre la libertad sindical y la protección del derecho de sindicación, 1948 (núm. 87) - Angola (Ratificación : 2001)

Legislative reforms. The Committee recalls that for many years it has been requesting the Government to:

• amend section 3 of the Trade Unions Act (No. 21 C/92), which provides that first-level organizations must include in their membership at least 30 per cent of workers in the occupational branches and sectors of economic activity at the provincial level, by lowering the percentage of workers needed to establish a first-level organization;
• confirm whether section 3(6) of the Trade Unions Act, which provides that first-level organizations must include in their membership at least 30 per cent of workers in the occupational branches and sectors of economic activity at the provincial level, enabled workers to organize at the enterprise level;
• amend section 2(2) of the Strikes Act (No. 23/91), which provides that any reduction or alteration of hours and methods of work that has been agreed upon collectively and does not imply refusal to work is not deemed to be a strike and may therefore be subject to disciplinary action, so as to ensure that the aforementioned forms of collective action are not subject to disciplinary measures;
• amend section 6 of the Strikes Act, which bans strike action by civilian workers in military institutions, so as to ensure that these workers may resort to strike action without incurring any penalties;
• amend section 10 of the Strikes Act, which provides that a strike may be declared only if two-thirds of the workers present in the assembly so agree, and that the employer is entitled to demand the presence of a representative of the public authority at any assembly for the calling of a strike, in order to check that it is properly constituted and its decisions properly adopted;
• provide clarification of the wording of section 20(1) of the Strikes Act, according to which, public service workers and trade unions must, in the event of a strike, provide “through pickets”, the services required to meet the basic needs of the population, and indicate the exact meaning of the term “pickets” and the manner in which the necessary minimum services are determined in such an event. The Committee requested the Government to take advantage of the legislative reform to draft section 20(1) with more precision and to ensure that minimum services were determined, not solely by the public authorities, but in consultation with the employers’ and workers’ organizations concerned and that any disagreement is settled by an independent body;
• amend section 20(3) of the Strikes Act, which allows workers to be requisitioned in the event of a strike in: (a) the postal services; (b) fuel supply; (c) public transport; and (d) the loading and unloading of foodstuffs, since these are not essential services in the strict sense of the term (that is, services the interruption of which would endanger the lives, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population). The Committee recalls that, although employers may require compliance with minimum services, which are determined with the participation of workers’ organizations, requisitioning by a decision of the administrative authorities should only be possible in the following circumstances: (i) in the public service, only for public servants exercising authority in the name of the State; (ii) in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely, services the interruption of which would endanger the lives, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population; and (iii) in an acute national crisis. Negotiated minimum services may be required in cases (a), (b), (c) and (d);
• amend section 27 of the Strikes Act, which provides for the penalties of imprisonment and fines to organizers of a strike that has been forbidden, declared unlawful or suspended;
• indicate whether sympathy strikes or action to protest against economic and social policy considerations not contemplated in section 3 of the Strikes Act can be held without incurring penalties. The Committee had requested the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that the new legislation did not preclude the possibility of resorting to strike action against economic and social policy or to sympathy strikes;
• provide information on section 8(1) of the Strikes Act, under which the right to strike of workers in ports, airports, railways, air and maritime transport, and any other enterprise that provides essential goods or services for the army shall be exercised in a manner that does not affect the supplies needed for national defence. The Government had previously indicated that the bill revising the Strikes Act repealed this section and the Committee had therefore requested the Government to ensure that section 8(2), which provides for compulsory arbitration and for a mediation procedure in the case provided for under section 8(1), was also repealed; and
• explain the meaning of the phrase “in situations threatening public order or in the event of public disaster” in section 8(4), which provides for the suspension of the right to strike by a decision of the Council of Ministers in these cases and indicate in what circumstances and how many times this provision had been applied. The Government had pointed out that, as yet, a disaster had never coincided with a strike and that the legislative authority would take account of the fact that this section was outdated (the Government had also previously indicated that the new bill would provide that the suspension would be at the decision of the judicial authority).

The Committee, once again, notes with regret that the legislation is still pending revision. It notes, however, the Government’s indication that the Trade Unions Act and the Strike Act are scheduled for revision in 2025. The Commission expresses the firm hope that the Government will finally be able to report on the legislative reforms the Committee has been expecting for many years, and that its recommendations will be considered when the relevant laws are revised. The Committee expects the Government to provide information on all developments in this regard.

The Committee also recalls having noted more recently that section 1(2) of Act No. 33/20 of 17 August 2020 on civil requisitioning provides that “civil requisitioning is a measure of an exceptional nature enabling the State to have recourse to a number of specific measures necessary to ensure, in especially serious circumstances, the regular functioning of services or the availability of goods that are essential to the population or to vital sectors of the national economy,” and that section 13 of the Act includes activities that are not solely essential services in the strict sense of the term, including radio, television and teaching. In view of the foregoing and in the absence of any new information, the Committee once again requests the Government to ensure that the decision by the authorities to resort to civil requisitioning can only have the effect of restricting the right to strike: (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; or (iii) in a situation of an acute national crisis.The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the effect given in practice to Act No. 33/20.

The Committee recalls that the Government can avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office.