Suites données aux recommandations du comité et du Conseil d’administration - Rapport No. 409, Mars 2025

Cas no 3183 (Burundi) - Date de la plainte: 28-DÉC. -15 - En suivi

Effect given to the recommendations of the committee and the Governing Body

1. 19. The Committee examined this case, which concerned allegations of anti-union dismissal and the suspension of the employment contracts of members of the executive bureau of an enterprise level union in the telecommunications sector, affiliated to the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Burundi (CSB), at its October 2020 meeting [See 392nd Report, approved by the Governing Body at its 340th Session (October 2020), paras 299–308.]. On that occasion, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the implementation of the remedial measures provided for by the Court of Appeal in its decisions of 4 July 2017 and 8 March 2019 and on the outcome of the second appeal lodged by the company with the Supreme Court, as well as to provide specific information on the situation of Mr Martin Floris Nahimana and Mr Alexis Bizimana, both members of the executive bureau of the U-COM BURUNDI Workers’ Union (SYTCOM), affiliated to the CSB. The Committee also requested the Government to provide copies of all the relevant court decisions. The Government submitted its observations on 22 June 2021, 5 September 2022 and 5 April 2023.
2. 20. Concerning the enforcement of the remedial measures provided by the Court of Appeal, the Government states in its communication of 5 April 2023 that, following RSA 7158, where the Court of Appeal, in a judgment dated 8 March 2019 (ROA 45/2019), ordered the company ECONET LEO SA (hereinafter the company) to pay 17 months‘ salary in addition to the 19 months’ salary included in the period of suspension up to the date of judgment RSA 7158, the company applied to the Minister of Justice for a review of that judgment. The Minister ruled on 29 January 2020 that ROA 45/2019 could not be reviewed because it did not contradict RSA 7158 but rather clarified it. On 3 February 2020, the plaintiff applied to the Court of Appeal to enforce judgment RSA 7158, as clarified by judgment ROA 45/2019. With regard to the execution of the remedies provided for by the Court of Appeal in its decisions and the outcome of the second appeal brought by the company before the Supreme Court, the Government states that judgment RSA 7158 (the judgment of 8 March 2019 ROA 45/2019) has been executed in full and that the remedies provided for by the Court of Appeal in its decisions dated 4 July 2017 and 8 March 2019 have been observed. The Government also states that the SYTCOM union representatives chose dismissal over reinstatement and that the 17 months’ salary were paid to them. As to the second application to the Supreme Court (RSC 895), the Government states in its communication of 5 September 2022 that it was not declared admissible by the Supreme Court. The Government provides copies of all the relevant court decisions.
3. 21. With regard to the situation of Mr Martin Floris Nahimana and Mr Alexis Bizimana, the Government states that the case opposing them to company is currently pending and that a copy of the judgments will be made available once they have been handed down.
4. 22. The Committee notes the indication that the remedial measures ordered by the courts in the present case have been carried out, in particular that the employees opted for dismissal with reparation rather than reinstatement in the company and that a second appeal lodged by the company with the Supreme Court was not declared admissible. The Committee considers this point of the complaint closed.
5. 23. Furthermore, noting the Government's indication that the cases between Mr Martin Floris Nahimana and Mr Alexis Bizimana and the company, concerning suspension and dismissal dating back to 2015, are still pending before the courts, the Committee recalls that justice delayed is justice denied [See Compilation of decisions of the Committee on Freedom of Association, sixth edition, 2018, para. 170]. The Committee expects the judiciary to rule on these cases without further delay and the Government to keep it duly informed of the outcomes and any follow-up given. The Committee requests the Government to provide copies of the court decisions.