CMNT_TITLE_CAS

Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Belarus (RATIFICATION: 1956)

The Government communicated the following written information concerning measures taken to fulfil the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry.

Since the International Labour Conference in June 2008, the Government continued to take measures to implement the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry with the participation of all social partners. On 18 June 2008 in Minsk, together with the ILO, the Government organized a seminar on trade union protection against discrimination with the participation of all interested parties: the Federation of Trade Unions of Belarus (FTU), the Congress of Democratic Trade Unions (CDTU), the Radio and Electronic Workers' Union (REWU), the employers' organizations, state bodies, the office of the public prosecutor and the judiciary. In autumn 2008, the Government reduced ten times the price of renting the premises occupied by the trade unions irrespective of their affiliation. In December 2008, a General Agreement for 2009-10 was signed between the Government and the national associations of employers, FTU and CDTU. The Agreement stipulated for the first time that it applied to all employers and all trade unions in the country irrespective of their affiliation. On 21 January 2009 in Minsk, the Government and the ILO jointly organized a tripartite seminar on the fulfilment of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry with the participation of an equal number of representatives from the Government, trade unions (FTU, CDTU and REWU) and employers, followed by the tripartite mission of the ILO, the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and the International Organisation of Employers (IOE).

On the basis of the recommendations and with the support of all parties participating in the above seminar, the Government in collaboration with the ILO developed an Action Plan for the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry, which was officially approved by the National Council on Labour and Social Issues on 20 February 2009. The Plan established an effective mechanism for the protection of trade union rights with the key role played by the tripartite Council for the Improvement of the Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere formed by an equal number of representatives (seven) from the sides of the Government, the trade unions and the employers' associations. The Government was represented by the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, including the Department of the State Labour Inspection, the Ministry of Justice, the Republican Labour Arbitration and the Office of the General Public Prosecutor. The trade unions were represented in the Council by four members from the FTU and three members of the CDTU. The employers had four members from the Confederation of Industry and Entrepreneurs and three members from the Business Union of the employers and entrepreneurs named after Professor Kuniavsky. The Council was headed by the Minister of Labour and Social Protection of Belarus.

The meeting of the Council on 30 April 2009, with the participation of a representative of REWU, discussed the question of the registration of trade union organizations and worked out agreed conclusions concerning regional organizations of the Belarus Free Trade Union (BFTU) in Baranovichi, Mohilev and Novopolotsk-Polotsk, the trade union of individual entrepreneurs "Together", primary-level organization of the Belarussian Independent Trade Union of the workers of OAO "Belshina" (city of Bobruisk), primary-level organizations of the REWU in Rechitsa, Smolevichi, Mohilev and Gomel (two organizations). The Council had confirmed the status of the regional organization of BFTU in Novopolotsk-Polotsk and the primary-level organizations of the REWU in Smolevichi and Rechitsa, which were subsequently registered. The Council had noted that the regional organization of BFTU in Baranovichi had not submitted documents for registration to the competent bodies. It had considered the information of the Ministry of Justice and of the representatives of the CDTU concerning refusal in 1999-2000 to register the regional organization of BFTU in Mohilev, as well as the refusal to register the trade union of individual entrepreneurs "Together" in 2007, and observed that, in the situation which existed at the time, certain problems could not have been overcome. At the time of the Council's meeting only one trade union organization of those under consideration had difficulties in obtaining a legal address - the primary-level organization of the workers of OAO "Belshina", and could not for this reason receive registration. The Council unanimously supported the need for a positive solution to this situation and at present appropriate premises to establish the legal address had been found, which should enable this organization to register in due course.

Having considered the refusals to register primary-level organizations of the REWU in Mohilev and Gomel, the Council had unanimously decided that the refusals in question were justified because these organizations were not genuine trade unions as their members were not united by common professional interests in breach of article 1 of the Law on Trade Unions. The Council had rejected the argument advanced by the representative of REWU that common interests of the members of these organizations resulted from the fact that all of them were salaried employees. It did not, however, infringe on the right of the REWU to freely determine the structure and activities of its organizations and confirmed the legitimacy of creating such organizations inside professions and industries other than the radio and electronic industry, provided that article 1 of the Law on Trade Unions was fully observed.

The same meeting of the Council dealt with the future development of Belarussian legislation on trade unions on the basis of Conventions Nos 87 and 98. It recognized the need for consultations between the social partners on these issues, the priority areas of which concerned the principles and conditions of the creation of trade unions, including their registration, collective bargaining in conditions of multiplicity of existing trade unions and their representativeness. The members of the Council had to submit their concrete proposals on these issues for consideration by the Council by 1 July 2009.

With regard to the application of the existing legislation on trade unions, the representative of the Ministry of Justice confirmed that the requirement to have 10 per cent of the total number of employees in the undertaking does not concern the organizational structure of the trade unions. Primary-level organizations could be formed with such number of members as stipulated in the statute of the trade union (usually from three to ten members). This clarification was included in the minutes of the Council's meeting and transmitted by the Ministry of Justice to the local authorities responsible for registration of the trade unions. In Belarus, trade unions were traditionally formed at the national level, affiliated or not to the FTU, with their primary-level organizations acting at the enterprise level. The decision of the Council concerning the 10 per cent requirement would have a direct impact on safeguarding the principles of freedom of association under the existing national law.

The meeting of the Council on 14 May 2009 dealt with the cases of dismissal of the workers mentioned in the report of the Committee on Freedom of Association (Gaichenko, Duchomenko, Obuchov, Shaitor, Cherbo, Stukov), who were invited to and participated in the meeting (except Mr Gaichenko) and given a day of leave for this purpose by their employers. Mr Gaichenko informed the secretariat of the Council that he was satisfied with his present employment at the enterprise "Naftan" (city of Novopolotsk). The Council noted that each of the above cases was settled by a court decision against the worker in question. In this situation any attempt of the Council to reinstate these workers in their previous employment would have been null: reinstatement would have been possible only after revision of the previous court decisions and qualification of dismissals as unlawful, whereas the workers concerned refused to appeal against the court decision taken in 2004. Having considered each individual situation in detail, the Council had taken measures which resulted in finding new employment for Mr Cherbo and Mr Shaitor, confirming an uninterrupted period of employment for Mr Stukov despite his dismissal and subsequent reinstatement in his previous job, and offering other types of assistance to Mr Duchomenko and Mr Obuchov.

The Government of Belarus considered that during the last year there had been radical change and substantial progress in the implementation of the ILO recommendations. Problems with registration of trade unions were being resolved and cases of pressure on trade union members were being dealt with by the tripartite body trusted by the interested parties. It should be noted that all the decisions of the Council for the Improvement of the Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere taken on 30 April and 14 May 2009 reflected a concerted opinion of all its members. With regard to future activities, the Council decided to consider the question of improving existing legal mechanisms of protecting persons against discrimination in employment due to their trade union membership on the basis of proposals submitted by the members of the Council not later than 1 August 2009. The Government would continue cooperation with the ILO concerning the activities of the Council.

In addition, before the Committee a Government representative (Deputy Prime Minister) stated that the Government was optimistic about the present situation and that considerable progress had been made in the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry as a result of the constructive steps taken by the Government. He emphasized that, on the basis of social partnership and in close cooperation with all the social partners, a considerable number of issues had been dealt with. However, he indicated that the Government would not stop there. He therefore called for the Conference Committee to take into account in its conclusions the positive steps that had been made in the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and to give effect to the Convention.

The Employer members noted that this case had been the subject of a double footnote in the report of the Committee of Experts, and that it was the ninth time that it had been examined by the Conference Committee. They recalled that a Commission of Inquiry had been set up in November 2003 by the Governing Body. They believed that it was important to note the change in the case when compared with the situation in 2005 and 2006. The Government's attitude was now much more positive. It was to be welcomed that where the Government had previously talked of the need to adapt the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry to the national situation, it was now speaking of their direct and full implementation without reservations. Over the past three years, the Government had discussed its cooperation with the ILO, which included seminars and technical assistance, and had resulted in a new draft law which was intended to address the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. However, as the Committee of Experts had pointed out, problems remained with the content of the draft bill, such as: establishing unions at the enterprise level without legal personality; the requirement of a legal address for registration; the link between representativeness and the rights of trade unions; the level of formality of the registration procedure; the power of registration authorities to request and obtain information on the statutory activities of trade unions; and the requirement of 10 per cent membership to be registered at the enterprise level. They emphasized that, to the Government's credit, it had withdrawn the draft bill and had proceeded in another direction.

The Employer members noted that the observation of the Committee of Experts was relatively short, due to the changed approach in this case. However, they emphasized that the next observation should be more extensive, providing further detail on the real situation. As indicated in the written information provided by the Government, there were a number of tripartite processes that addressed key issues, such as the action plan, legislation and the regulation of unions. However, they added that it would have been preferable if the Government had been closer to meeting the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. The Committee of Experts, had indicated in its observation that the Government had not provided the information requested on certain substantive aspects of the case. The Committee of Experts would have to determine whether the written information communicated by the Government satisfied its requests for information. In particular, the action plan should be submitted to the Committee of Experts.

In conclusion, the Employer members welcomed the information provided and the constructive attitude demonstrated by the Government. However, they expressed concern that what was described was a procedural process with a tripartite basis, and that the process might overcome the substantive legal and regulatory matters. They considered that what was needed was a clear time-bound plan of action to meet the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and give full effect to Convention No. 87 in law and practice. For example, the process relating to registration of unions was very bureaucratic and needed to be further streamlined in practice. Finally, they called for urgency and speed in the implementation of the Convention.

The Worker members recalled the conclusions adopted when the case had been examined in 2008 by the Conference and the trust that had been extended to the Government. The conclusions had reflected the commitment of Belarus to organize a seminar on anti-union discrimination with the participation of ILO representatives and also to organize a broader seminar in the autumn of 2008 on the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry established in 2003. The Committee had expressed the firm hope that the Governing Body and the Committee of Experts in November 2008 would be able to observe positive developments and would be provided with full statistics on the registration of trade unions and on complaints on anti-union discrimination.

It should be noted that the representatives of the Office, the ITUC and the IOE had visited Minsk in June 2008 to attend a seminar organized by the Government of Belarus on anti-union discrimination. However, the seminar had not addressed the question of bringing the national legislation on the registration of trade unions, the Labour Code, or the situation of workers who were on strike, into conformity with the Convention. This appeared to be due to the fact that the issue of registering trade unions lay within the competence of the Ministry of Justice, and not the Ministry of Labour. It should also be noted that the seminar had been like a training course and, at least in formal terms, came within the context of the Committee's conclusions adopted the previous year. Moreover, the tripartite seminar on the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry of 2003 had been held in January 2009, after the meeting of the Committee of Experts and had been attended by an Executive Director of the ILO, government representatives, trade unions affiliated or not to the Trade Union Federation of Belarus, employers' organizations, the ILO, the ITUC and the IOE. The independent trade unions had had 20 participants out of the 55 trade unionists present at the seminar, which had resulted in the formulation of an action plan that had been approved by the Tripartite National Council on Social and Labour Issues in February 2009. It was within this context that the Government had made a proposal to modify the composition of the Council for the improvement of the legislation in a tripartite manner. The CDTU had been requested to delegate three representatives of independent trade unions among the seats allocated to trade union organizations. The Council had held two meetings and its main function was to receive the requests and complaints from trade union organizations concerning cases of refusal to register trade unions and discrimination against trade union members.

With respect to the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry, it should be noted that the problems relating to the registration of independent trade unions had not entirely been solved, contrary to the claims made by the Government. This situation was irreparable in cases where trade unions had ceased to exist. Anti-union discrimination had not been completely eliminated as some independent trade unions were still being refused the right to conclude collective agreements, and it was necessary to end harassment against independent trade unions. Finally, no tangible progress had been made concerning most of the recommendations. It was impossible to find solutions in three or four months for matters that had not been resolved for years, as in practice many situations were irreparable. A solution had to be found rapidly, as emphasized by the Committee of Experts, to prevent a degradation of the situation relating to the registration of trade unions.

The Government had shown its will to respond to certain recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry, as illustrated by the new composition and actions of the Council for the Improvement of the Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere. However, as indicated by the Committee of Experts, the Government had not provided the detailed statistics requested on the registration of trade unions and complaints of anti-union discrimination.

In conclusion, even if a mechanism had been established, this was only a small first step. The Government's credibility in the implementation of this mechanism would be tested in July 2009, when the Council would address the future development of national legislation on trade unions in the light of the principles and conditions for their establishment, registration and representativeness deriving from Conventions Nos 87 and 98. All trade unions had been invited to submit proposals to that effect. The Worker members did not doubt that the proposals made by the three members of the CDTU would be fully discussed. It was to be hoped that the Government as a whole considered the completion of the adoption of the draft legislation to be a priority. The mechanism that had been set up needed to operate in accordance with tripartite procedures, and ensure the involvement of increasingly independent social partners. It would be unacceptable after so many discussions of this case for the Government to have the feeling that it had fulfilled its obligations.

The Government member of the Czech Republic, speaking also on behalf of the Government members of the Member States of the European Union, and the candidate countries Croatia, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Turkey, the countries of the Stabilization and Association Process and potential candidates Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, the EFTA countries, Iceland and Norway, the members of the European Economic Area, as well as the Republic of Moldova and Ukraine, indicated that the case of Belarus had been discussed by the Committee eight of the previous nine years, and that the report of the Committee of Experts reiterated major problems remaining in the application of Convention No. 87: the registration procedure of trade unions, and in particular the requirement for a legal address; the prohibition of exercising trade union rights; and the prohibition of receiving financial assistance from foreign sources.

He noted the findings of the Committee of Experts, and the updated information provided to the Governing Body in March 2009, when the European Union had welcomed the tripartite adoption of the plan of action. The plan was scheduled for implementation this year and covered most of the problems that had been highlighted by the Committee of Experts. If implemented fully and in good faith, the plan of action would become an important contribution towards the satisfactory resolution of this case.

He recalled that in previous years, the European Union had expressed concern regarding compliance by Belarus with Convention No. 87. He noted that some positive developments had recently taken place and he thanked the Office and the representatives of the social partners involved in this process. He encouraged all parties concerned to redouble their efforts in pursuing cooperation with a view to eliminating all obstacles for the establishment and operations of independent workers' and employers' organizations. The genuine exercise of freedom of association was an indispensable condition for meaningful social dialogue both at the enterprise and national levels, and consequently for any relevant activity in the world of work.

While the European Union acknowledged indications of the renewed commitment of the Government towards its international obligations, it was of utmost importance that such steps were transformed into tangible practical progress in the near future. He expected that the Government would continue in its current course of cooperating with the ILO in order to ensure the full realization of freedom of association and the right to organize for all workers in Belarus. He also called on the Government to provide in its next report on the application of the Convention all relevant information to enable the Committee of Experts to fully assess the situation in practice and the real impact of the various measures adopted by the Government.

The European Union would continue to monitor closely the situation in Belarus. He called upon the Government to comply fully with all the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry without further delay.

The Government member of the United States noted that since the Conference Committee last discussed this case and since the observations by the Committee of Experts, there had been some significant developments. Last March, the Governing Body had been informed about a tripartite mission and seminar in Minsk - organized jointly by the ILO and the Government - that had permitted a frank and open discussion of the trade union situation in Belarus and had led to the approval of a Plan of Action for the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. She understood that in furtherance of the Plan of Action, the tripartite parties had recently been examining questions relating to the registration of trade union organizations, the future development of the legislation on trade unions and the application of existing legislation. She noted that the Government considered that during the last year there had been radical change and substantial progress in the implementation of the Commission of Inquiry's recommendations. She welcomed these developments and trusted that the Government would continue to work closely with the ILO, as well as its social partners, in carrying out all the measures envisaged by the Plan of Action. However, she noted that, until the Committee of Experts had assessed the latest developments, she would continue to follow with concern the state of freedom of association in Belarus, particularly with regard to the registration of free and independent trade unions. She looked forward to the day when full respect for freedom of association was a reality in Belarus, when there would no longer be barriers in law or in practice to the right of all workers to associate, organize, register unions and express their points of view without threat of interference or reprisal. She hoped that day would be soon.

The Employer member of Belarus said that, in the opinion of employers in Belarus, the action taken by the Government to give effect to the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry to improve relations with workers and to normalize the trade union situation had been constructive and had resulted in tangible improvements in the situation with regard to social dialogue. The CDTU, as a member of the National Council on Labour and Social Issues (NCLSI), was a signatory of the general agreement between the Government and workers' and employers' organizations. The NCLSI had discussed and reached agreement on a number of social and economic issues and was promoting agreement between all the parties on national issues. With support from the ILO, an Action Plan had been developed with the support of employers' and workers' organizations. The NCLSI had discussed several issues, including problems relating to the registration of trade unions and the means of overcoming difficulties regarding trade union premises. Employers in the country had also helped trade unions to find premises, which all demonstrated the emerging culture of pluralism. They particularly wanted to see the Government improve the climate for enterprise activity. Belarus was a member of the European Union Eastern Partnership Programme and it was to be hoped that its membership would continue. He emphasized that partnership with the European Union was of great importance in developing the economy of Belarus and in helping workers find employment, particularly those who lived in deprived areas, such as the area affected by the Chernobyl disaster. He therefore called on the Conference Committee to encourage the Government in its action, which would have a positive effect on working and living conditions.

The Worker member of Belarus said that the Government was now taking action to give effect to the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. Although it was not yet implementing them in full, it was showing a certain political will to do so and was making progress. The considerable efforts that were being made were reflected in the written information provided by the Government. The Government was now working closely with all social partners, including all workers' organizations throughout the country. The seminar that had been held in June 2008, with the participation of ILO representatives, had been the first occasion on which all trade unions had been able to attend and speak at such an event. It had also offered them the opportunity to enter into discussions with the authorities, including officials of the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, the Ministry of Justice and the Office of the Public Prosecutor. Since then, social partnership had developed to the extent that discussions were full and free and the seminar organized in January 2009 had included representation of the ILO, the ITUC and the IOE. An important step forward had been the Action Plan adopted by the National Council on Labour and Social Issues and a very broad range of social partners had been involved in the preparation and implementation of the Plan. For example, the last two sessions of the Council for the Improvement of the Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere had considered a number of important issues, such as the registration of trade unions and the reinstatement of dismissed trade union activists. The Government had subsequently taken a number of measures to improve the process of the registration of trade unions.

He further emphasized that the legislation respecting the registration of trade unions applied to all trade union organizations throughout the country. It was therefore important to ensure that all the partners were represented on the National Council on Labour and Social Issues, including the CDTU. He urged all unions to work together, in particular for the formulation of the new national plan for the coming years, which had been receiving extensive coverage in the press. Although the situation was clearly not perfect, substantial progress had been achieved and it was to be hoped that this would be recognized by the ILO. Although all 12 of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry had not yet been implemented, it was not possible to achieve everything overnight. Belarus was now associated with the European Union Eastern Partnership Programme, and it was important that it became a full member of the Programme. However, there was opposition in certain circles to the inclusion of Belarus in the Programme, which was giving rise to unwarranted criticism of the situation in the country.

In conclusion, he emphasized that the social partners needed to work together to achieve full implementation of the Convention. He therefore hoped that the Government would help to improve and expand opportunities for trade union participation in the country. He urged the Government to allow the representatives of other trade unions to participate in the work of the Council for the Improvement of the Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere. He also called for workers' organizations to be actively involved in the negotiation of collective agreements and he urged all trade union leaders to work together for the implementation of the ILO's recommendations to give full effect to the Convention.

The Government member of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela congratulated the Government representative for the excellent description of his Government's efforts to implement Convention No. 87. He emphasized the positive aspects that should be duly acknowledged by the Committee. The Government had described in detail the measures that indicated that there had been progress in implementing the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. In 2006, Belarus had taken action to strengthen dialogue with social partners, including the establishment of the tripartite National Council on Labour and Social Issues and the Council for the Improvement of Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere, known as the Council of Experts.

At previous sessions of the International Labour Conference, the Committee on the Application of Standards had recognized the progress made by the Government of Belarus; as had the Governing Body. At the 304th Session of the Governing Body, in March 2009, the Report of the Director-General referred to the tripartite seminar on the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry, and which had been held in Minsk in January 2009 with the participation of representatives of the ILO, the ITUC and the IOE together with national trade unions and employers' organizations and high-ranking government representatives. As a result of the seminar, a government Action Plan had been developed for the application of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry in relation to trade union rights, which had been adopted by the tripartite partners.

He considered that much progress had been made in Belarus regarding its compliance with Convention No. 87, as confirmed by many of the social partners. He emphasized that the Conference Committee should note in its conclusions that this was a case of progress.

The Worker member of the Russian Federation said that the Russian trade union movement as a whole was monitoring very carefully the manner in which the Government was giving effect to the 12 recommendations made by the Commission of Inquiry. He emphasized that there were very close political, economic, social and cultural links between the Russian Federation and Belarus, as well as many human and family links, as many Russian workers had relatives in Belarus. The protection of trade union rights in both countries was therefore of great importance to Russian trade unions. In the discussion of the case in the Governing Body in March 2009, the Workers' group had expressed cautious optimism at the positive steps taken by the Government. Russian trade unions were also quite optimistic, as the system of social dialogue appeared to have the support of all the trade unions in the country, although the measures taken were as yet fragmentary and needed to be pursued further. The legislation that was in violation of the Convention had not yet been repealed and therefore continued to limit collective bargaining and to make it very difficult for trade unions in the country to receive support from the international federations to which they were affiliated. However, there had also been positive changes and the Government and the social partners, with ILO support, had adopted an Action Plan, which was a type of road map, and confirmed the intention of the authorities to solve the problems under discussion. The action taken needed to be carefully examined by the ILO supervisory system and it was to be hoped that the Action Plan would be developed in detail and would result in the full implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry, to which effect had not yet been given. In conclusion, he urged the Government to use the various anniversaries that were currently being celebrated, including the 60th anniversary of the adoption of Conventions Nos 87 and 98, and the 90th anniversary of the ILO, as a stimulus to help it achieve fuller and more rapid implementation of the ILO's recommendations.

The Government member of the Russian Federation thanked the Government representative for the information provided on the action that was being taken for the implementation of the Convention. As in the discussions of the case in the Governing Body sessions in November 2008 and March 2009, it was evident that clear and substantial progress was being made in the implementation of international labour standards, and particularly Convention No. 87 and the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. Dialogue was now being developed with all social partners on a range of issues, including the implementation of the ILO's recommendations in the present case. Work was being carried out for the development of new legislation respecting trade unions which took into account the recommendations of the ILO and the opinions of the social partners. The Government was continuing its cooperation with the ILO and a tripartite seminar had been held in January on freedom of association, social dialogue and the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. ILO specialists had participated in the formulation of the Action Plan that had been approved by the Council for the Improvement of the Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere. The Council, the membership of which included representatives of independent trade unions, had held two sessions recently in which it had examined issues including the registration of trade unions, employment of the dismissed trade union activists and the prospects for the development of new legislation respecting trade unions. Several decisions had been taken. The procedures had been improved for the registration of primary-level trade unions and certain dismissed trade union activists had been reinstated. Substantive progress had therefore recently been achieved on the basis of social partnership. The Government had entered into sincere and constructive cooperation with the ILO as it had repeatedly demonstrated through its actions.

The Government member of Cuba noted that the activities carried out in 2008 with the ILO were of particular interest and that, in addition to the tripartite seminars that had been organized, a general agreement had been concluded for 2009 and 2010, which applied to all the trade unions and employers in the country, regardless of their affiliation. The tripartite seminar held in Minsk on the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry had been attended by the representatives of the Government, trade unions and employers, and had been monitored by a tripartite mission of the ILO, the ITUC and the IOE.

The National Council on Labour and Social Issues, which was a tripartite institution with broad representation of government bodies, employers and workers, had approved the action plan that had been developed by the Government and the ILO in consultation with the social partners for the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. The Plan established a mechanism to protect trade union rights and entrusted the Council with a fundamental role in improving labour legislation. It should be emphasized that several trade union organizations had been registered and that, according to the Government, positive solutions were being sought for an organization that had encountered difficulties with its registration. Another set of activities had been carried out in the course of this year, which demonstrated the Government's concern to give effect to the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and reflected the concerted views of the employers and workers.

She considered that the Government had taken positive steps, both in practice and with a view to the preparation of legislation setting out the principles of Convention No. 87, and that a process was being undertaken for dialogue and for the establishment of a tripartite body accepted by all parties concerned, which should be emphasized in the conclusions of the Committee.

The Government member of China thanked the Government representative for the information provided. Since 2005, the Government had been taking effective measures to improve the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry, which had resulted in significant progress, which should be fully recognized by the Committee. While the ILO and the Government continued to cooperate and mutual trust and dialogue continued to be strengthened, the issues relating to the implementation of the Convention would be resolved.

The Government member of Canada thanked the Government representative for the information provided. Noting with appreciation the statements made on behalf of the European Union and the United States, he said that his Government was concerned at the Government's continued disregard for international appeals to respect human rights and democratic principles, including the rights of workers to form and join organizations of their own choosing. Although there had been some progress since the last Conference, including the convening of the Tripartite Council for the Improvement of Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere and tripartite seminars had been organized, there were still many entrenched legal and bureaucratic obstacles preventing the registration of trade unions and the exercise of their legitimate activities, including the organization of meetings free from interference by the public authorities. His Government would continue to work with other ILO members to encourage reform in Belarus and he called upon the Government to continue to strengthen tripartite cooperation and to bring its law and practice into full conformity with the Convention. He urged the Government to fully implement the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and hoped that the ILO would continue to support the Government to bring about tangible results in practice.

An observer representing the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) recalled that Case No. 2090 had been under examination in the ILO for almost ten years. But for the first time there appeared to be the hope of light at the end of the tunnel. The previous year, the Conference Committee had reached a compromise with the Government, which had proved to be a good decision. The problem of trade union rights had come into being many years ago and the efforts of the Ministry of Labour on its own had not been sufficient to resolve it. While a plan of action to give effect to the ILO's recommendations had been developed by the Government jointly with the ILO, the ITUC and the social partners, and steps had been taken to implement it, the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry were still not fully implemented. Unions and their members were still under pressure and anti-union discrimination still existed. The Government's intention to resolve the problem of activists dismissed for their trade union activities was important and it was also essential to remove the mechanisms and practices of anti-union discrimination and to guarantee that members of independent unions were not subject to pressure by the administration of enterprises. If it was important for the Government to start taking measures to overcome the refusal to register independent union organizations, it was even more important to remove the reasons for which such organizations disappeared. The requirement of previous authorization for the establishment of trade unions needed to be abolished.

He added that, in violation of the existing laws, employers refused to conclude collective agreements with independent unions in certain cases and put pressure on their members. Moreover, the Office of the Public Prosecutor and the courts ignored violations of the rights of independent trade unions. The existing legislation made it impossible in practice to organize meetings, marches, demonstrations, picketing and other actions to defend trade union rights. Real progress could only be achieved when ILO principles of freedom of association were fully implemented and workers could freely establish and join the organizations of their own choosing, without fear of reprisals. While considering that the Government was demonstrating a certain level of political will in developing an action plan with the social partners, he emphasized the importance of achieving tangible results in the near future.

The Worker member of China noted the information provided by the Government representative and indicated that he had followed closely the issue of the implementation of the Convention in Belarus and the progress that was being made. He therefore hoped that the Government would strengthen its cooperation with the ILO with a view to safeguarding trade union rights and achieving decent work for the workers of the country.

The Government representative of Belarus thanked all the speakers and emphasized that his Government was very open to dialogue and to discussing any issues raised. The interventions during the discussion would be examined and used to guide the action that would be taken in the future. The success of social partnership depended greatly on full trust being established between all the participants. Experience in the country had shown that many issues were less difficult to address because of the positive participation of the social partners, who had been fully involved in preparing and approving the action plan and who were continuing to consider the issues that arose and to take action on them together. He emphasized that all the participants in the Council for the Improvement of the Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere participated as independent members and had the right to express their own views in full freedom. However, they had developed a common position and had all approved the Action Plan and were working together for its implementation. The Government was demonstrating its willingness to work with all parties and, on the basis of social partnership, to develop legislation for the implementation of Conventions Nos 87 and 98 and to address and resolve all outstanding problems in this respect. It could therefore be seen that work had been carried out steadily and logically on a step by step basis. The Government had held consultations at every stage and had therefore kept all its promises to the Conference Committee and to the social partners. It was also working on further proposals to be put to the social partners. It had worked in close cooperation with the ILO, which had contributed to the organization and financing of the tripartite seminar held in January, in which ILO experts had played a very active role. His Government greatly appreciated the support provided and hoped that it would be continued. He recalled that when the present case had been examined by the Conference Committee the previous year, that had been the first occasion on which it had not been set out in a special paragraph of the Committee's report. For the Government and the social partners this had provided a clear indication that the ILO supported the efforts that were being made to improve the situation and all partners had stepped up their efforts, achieving substantive progress in the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. The Conference Committee therefore had it within its power to encourage all those involved to make yet further progress.

The Employer members indicated that the Government deserved credit for the rapid and constructive action taken since the last Conference and the step by step approach adopted to the improvement of the situation. However, they were not reassured that all the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry would be implemented in the near future. At the very least, the Government should be called upon to provide a detailed report in time for the next session of the Committee of Experts, which should include a copy of the Action Plan. They therefore encouraged the Government to keep up its positive efforts and attitude and to continue taking action for the sustainable implementation of the Convention.

The Worker members indicated that there was no question of concluding that significant progress had been achieved, which would leave the impression that all the 2003 recommendations had been given effect. A mechanism had been established, as emphasized by many speakers, which constituted a first small step, but much remained to be done in practice. The Worker members hoped that the Government would take this measure and develop it in conformity with the Convention, where necessary with ILO technical assistance. Although little was needed for this mechanism to work well, what was lacking was of utmost importance. The Council for the Improvement of the Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere needed to develop a road map setting out transparent procedures of which all trade unions without exception were informed and which included the following: the establishment of a timeframe for the investigation of complaints concerning the refusal of trade union registration and anti-union discrimination which offered guarantees of legal security and transparency; laying down rules concerning the timely processing of complaints; and compliance with tripartite procedures by ensuring the involvement of the increasingly independent social partners. They stated that the Government should be asked to provide a report on the operation of the Council in practice, in particular with regard to the items mentioned above, for examination by the Committee of Experts at its next session, including detailed statistics on the registration of trade unions and on cases of complaints for anti-union discrimination, requested previously.

Conclusions

The Committee took note of the written and oral information provided by the Government representative, the Deputy Prime Minister, on the recent steps his Government had taken to implement the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and the discussion that followed.

The Committee noted the detailed information provided by the Government representative in relation to the developments since the discussion of this case last year and observed with interest the cooperation with the ILO in this regard.

The Committee took note of the seminar on anti-union discrimination held in Minsk in June 2008 and welcomed the fact that it provided for an open and frank discussion of the trade union situation in Belarus. The Committee further welcomed the outcome of a tripartite seminar on the implementation of the Commission of Inquiry's recommendations organized jointly by the ILO and the Government of Belarus in January 2009. It welcomed in particular the plan of action to implement the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry subsequently adopted by the tripartite National Council on Labour and Social Issues.

The Committee further noted with interest that pursuant to the plan of action, the Council for the Improvement of Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere evolved into a fully tripartite body where trade unions could raise their concerns and that the Council's composition now included three representatives of the Congress of Democratic Trade Unions (CDTU). The Committee noted the detailed information provided by the Government on the two sittings of the Council at which it had discussed issues of trade union registration, dismissals of trade union members and the need for consultations with the social partners concerning further development of trade union legislation. The Committee understood that members of the Council had been invited to submit concrete proposals for legislative amendment by 1 July 2009 for the Council's consideration.

The Committee also noted with interest that the CDTU is now a party to the General Agreement for 2009-10 and that the Government had reduced by ten times the price of rent for trade unions irrespective of their affiliation, a matter which had given rise to an additional impediment for meeting the legal address requirement necessary for registration.

The Committee considered that the measures undertaken by the Government and the will demonstrated by the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, now given further force in the statement by the Deputy Prime Minister, to address the outstanding recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry constituted certain progress which, if sustained and transformed into tangible advances towards freedom of association in practice, could become an important contribution towards the application of the Convention. The Committee expressed its concern, however, that these steps might remain only a matter of process and not give rise to substantive improvements. In this regard, the Committee noted with regret that there were as yet no concrete proposals to amend Presidential Decree No. 2 dealing with trade union registration, the Law on Mass Activities, and Presidential Decree No. 24 concerning the use of foreign gratuitous aid. The Committee considered that in light of the allegations that independent trade unions continued to experience difficulties in practice with registration and anti-union discrimination, the amendments requested by the Commission of Inquiry in this regard remained necessary.

In light of the continued commitment to social dialogue expressed by the Government, the Committee encouraged the Government to redouble its efforts to ensure full freedom of association in close cooperation with all the social partners and with the assistance of the ILO. In particular, the Committee requested the Government to prepare a clear, time-bound plan for the full implementation of all of the Commission of Inquiry's recommendations, including transparent procedures for the participation of all trade unions and aimed at the elimination of all remaining mechanisms and practices used to intimidate and persecute workers who wished to organize in independent trade unions. It requested the Government to furnish information on the progress made in this regard as well as on any further developments to the Committee of Experts at its meeting this year and expected that it would be in a position to note significant progress with respect to all remaining matters at its meeting next year.