Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Comoros (Ratification: 1978)

The Committee takes note of the Government's report and recalls that its comments address the following points:

(1)The absence of trade union organisations in the country.

(2)The exclusion of magistrates from the scope of Act No. 80-22 of 10 January 1981 containing the General Regulations for Public Servants.

(3)The requisitioning of public servants on strike (other than those acting in their capacity as agents of the public authority) to ensure, in particular, the continuity of public services (section 7(8) of Act No. 80-22).

(4)The scope of section 391 of Penal Code (Act No. 81-06 of 19 November 1982).

1. In its previous request, the Committee asked the Government to keep it informed of action taken to inform workers of the rights conferred on them by legislation to defend their occupational interests.

In the absence of any information on this point in the Government's report, the Committee again requests the Government to provide information on the situation of the trade union movement in the Comoros and on the measures taken to encourage and further the restructuring of the trade union movement.

2. As regards magistrates, the Committee notes that, according to the report of the Government, the magistrates who are presently in post are not yet organised in the form of a corps. That being the case, no particular legislation has been adopted in relation to them for the moment. The persons who presently perform the functions of the judiciary are recruited as civil administrators and, as such, are governed by Act No. 80-22 of 10 January 1981, in particular with regard to the right to organise. It also notes that the right to strike of public servants is recognised by the same law.

3. With regard to the procedure for requisitioning in the event of strikes in the public services, the Committee notes from the information supplied by the Government that this measure applies to services the interruption of which would seriously disrupt the day-to-day life of the population, that under section 7(9) of Act No. 80-22 this procedure may be applied only to a limited number of persons and that, although there have been strikes in the public service, in particular by primary and secondary school teachers, there has been no recourse to this provision.

Recalling that the requisitioning of workers on strike should be confined to services whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the population, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on all cases in which this provision might be applied in the future.

4. In its previous request, the Committee asked the Government to provide information on the scope of section 391 of the Penal Code which provides for fines and/or imprisonment to be imposed on anyone taking any kind of collective action with a view to disrupting the functioning of a public or private teaching establishment, especially through the irregular occupation of the premises of these establishments, but excepting therefrom the normal exercise of the right to strike.

The Government indicates that this provision establishes the sanctions to be applied in the event of violation of section 7(12) of Act No. 80-22 which forbids public servants from occupying places of work and their immediate vicinity.

While noting this statement, the Committee wishes to draw the Government's attention to the following point: section 7(5) provides that strikes are prohibited and liable to disciplinary sanctions unless one month has elapsed since the dispatch of the notice of the strike to the competent authorities by the trade union organisation or organisations. The Committee notes that, in the absence of trade union organisations, public servants are unable to have legal recourse to strike; furthermore, section 391 of the Penal Code could be applied to public servants in the public education sector, who would not have the possibility of resorting to the exception clause as their action would not constitute "the normal exercise of the right to strike" for the reasons mentioned above.

The Committee considers that, in view of the present situation of the trade union movement, these provisions are liable to undermine the right of public servants (other than those acting in their capacity as agents of the public authority) to resort to strike action as a means of protecting their interests. It requests the Government to indicate the measures it intends to take to guarantee that these workers are entitled to resort to strikes without being liable to the sanctions provided for under section 7 of Act No. 80-22, which can be compounded, in respect of teachers, under section 391 of the Penal Code.