Cas individuel (CAS) - Discussion : 1991, Publication : 78ème session CIT (1991)

Convention (n° 87) sur la liberté syndicale et la protection du droit syndical, 1948 - Myanmar (Ratification: 1955)

The Government has communicated the following information:

The year 1988 saw historic, social, economic and political change in Myanmar, whereby the socialist way of life under the one-party system was drastically replaced by the multi-party democracy system. With the abolition of the one-party political system, the unitary workers' organisation which had been the order of the day for more than 20 years has also dissipated. Even though there has been no formal amendment or repeal made to the Act No. 6 of 1964 and Regulation No. 5 of 1976, they became automatically defunct. Eighty-five out of over 200 political parties registered with the Election Commission competed in the general elections which had been recongnised as one of the most free and fair elections. Most of those political parties had their own affiliated workers' organisations. There are also workers' organisations formed along the lines of trades and professions such as Musicians' and Dramatists' Association, Painters' and Sculptors' Council, Film Artistes' Organisation, Writers' and Journalists' Association, Medical Doctors' Association and Nurses' Association.

In addition, a Government representative reiterated the written information communicated by his Government. He also indicated that the Committee of Experts had rightly pointed out that the provisions of the law concerning the formation of workers' organisations in his country restricted the creation of trade unions to a single trade union structure, which was contrary to the provisions of Articles 2, 5 and 6 of the Convention. The Act and Regulation in question had been enacted when Myanmar had been practising a one-party political system. Following the disturbances in the latter part of 1988, many changes had taken place, including: (a) the abolition of the one-party political system and its replacement by a multi-party democratic system; (b) the replacement of the centrally planned economic system by a market-oriented economy. He stressed that with the abolition of the one-party system, the unitary trade union structure had been automatically removed and the Act and Regulation permitting a single trade union had become automatically defunct. His country was currently going through a transitional period involving major transformations. It was in the process of drawing up a new Constitution which would contain express provisions for freedom of association and protection of the right to organise, in line with the Convention. His Government had already submitted a detailed report to the Committee of Experts for the period ending June 1991 and would keep that Committee informed of all relevant developments.

The Workers' members noted that for many years the Committee of Experts had been making comments on the single trade union system established by law, which was contrary to the principle of the Convention. The Government representative had just repeated what had been said in this Committee in 1989, namely that there had been political changes having consequences for trade union organisations. There would be a new Constitution, but neither the written information provided by the Government nor the oral statement of the Government representative had mentioned other texts or new legislation. That was why the present Committee had to insist that changes had not yet been made and texts not yet adopted in full conformity with the principles of the Convention.

The Employers' members recalled that the Government representative himself had indicated that the trade union monopoly still existed under the legislation and was a violation of the Convention. He had also said that since the political changes in 1988, practice was different. However, as had been done in 1989, they believed that the present Committee should insist that the law be changed as well. If there was a political willingness to do this, they were of the opinion that there would be no difficulties in eliminating this legal monopoly system.

The Workers' member of Sri Lanka considered that the Government representative had added nothing to what had been said in 1989. Since the Government representative hoped that the Constitution would make the changes required in order to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention, the speaker asked him to indicate the time-frame for these statutory changes.

The Government representative explained that certain steps to amend, repeal or make some necessary changes to the 1964 Act were being taken; the Committee would be informed when progress had been made.

The Committee noted the written and oral information supplied by the Government and the debate that had taken place in the Committee. Nevertheless, it expressed its concern at the fact that despite the firm assurances given to the present Committee and to the Committee of Experts, which had just been repeated, the Government had still not taken specific measures to bring its legislation into conformity with the requirements of Articles 2, 5 and 6 of the Convention. The Committee had to insist once again that the Governmetn take urgent legislative steps so as to lift the restrictions on the freedom of workers and employers to establish occupational organisations of their own choosing and to make it possible for trade union pluralism to exist. It expressed the hope that the Government would be able to report on measures taken to bring its legislation into full conformity with the requirements of the Convention, in accordance with the assurances it had given on several occasions and that the Committee would be in a position to note real progress in this respect in the near future.