Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2001, Publication: 89th ILC session (2001)

Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Colombia (Ratification: 1976)

A Government representative, the Minister of Labour and Social Security, welcomed the constant concern of the international community for the situation in Colombia and the peace process in his country. He recalled the efforts that were being made by the Government to achieve peace, but said that nevertheless the conflict had become very much worse. He emphasized that the policy of the Government was to support the peace process, negotiate, enter into dialogue and seek agreements with the guerrilla organizations in the country, but never with the paramilitary groups, which were the major enemies of peace. The Government was taking legal and military action against the paramilitary groups. In Colombia, action was being taken to prevent any progress being made in the peace process, as illustrated by the attack on the trade union leader Dr. Wilson Borja. That attack had been condemned by the Government and repudiated by Colombian society, in the same way as the other acts against peace, such as the murder of trade union leaders, political leaders, entrepreneurs, media workers and priests, as well as kidnappings, massacres and disappearances. He stated that during the course of 2001 over 40 trade unionists had been murdered and that, according to the Government, 95 per cent of these murders had been committed by paramilitary groups which were opposed to trade unionism. The Government had engaged in dialogue with the guerrillas and was taking military action against the paramilitary forces, as well as combating arrangements between public officials and these groups. Hundreds of members of paramilitary groups had been detained and their goods and arms confiscated. A commission of eminent persons had been set up and would produce a report on possible relations between members of the armed forces and paramilitary groups. Within three months, the commission would make proposals for the dismantling of these groups. The Government had taken initiatives to provide protection to trade unionists, for which there was currently a protection fund of 2.5 million US dollars. He added that the support of the ILO in maintaining the fund had been of great importance and that support had been sought from other countries to collaborate in the protection of trade unionists.

He indicated that a fundamental aspect of decreasing the level of violence was for the international community to collaborate in reaching an agreement between the State and the guerrillas concerning the civil population within the context of international humanitarian law. The development of a better environment for the defence of human rights would also make it possible to create a better environment for the peace process. Ten days ago, the Government had signed the first agreement with the main guerrilla organization in the country (FARC) on a humanitarian exchange, as a result of which the group would free 100 soldiers and police officers and the Government would free 15 guerrillas on humanitarian and health grounds. This could mark the beginning of new agreements. At the present time, efforts were also being made to reach an agreement with the insurgent group ELN. He emphasized the fact that there was no state policy against trade unionism, but said that he was aware of the existence of a situation of violence which had to be eradicated with the help of the international community. The situation of violence also affected the exercise of trade union rights, as set out in the Convention, and particularly endangered the life of trade unionists. He said that he was aware that the subject would once again be addressed in a few days in the Governing Body when it examined the third report of the Special Representative of the Director-General for Cooperation with Colombia, Dr. Alburquerque. He emphasized that the Government was open to collaboration with the international community, as illustrated by the presence over the past five years in the country of the Special Representative of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, whose reports recalled the need to respect human rights. The Government valued the presence of Dr. Alburquerque and the door was open to any trade union, employers' or government organization which wished to collaborate in the peace process. He added that any cooperation with the ILO would be welcome and if the Governing Body decided to extend the mandate of the Special Representative, such a proposal would be supported. If it were to be decided to set up a commission of inquiry, Colombia would also be prepared to examine this possibility, since its people were tired of so many deaths and, if it continued down the path of violence, it would be heading towards self-destruction. He emphasized that the Government was prepared to discuss joint solutions within the framework of the ILO. With reference to the observation of the Committee of Experts, he noted that the progress made in the legislation by Act No. 584 had been welcomed. However, he noted that other matters had not been addressed. He referred in this respect to the right to strike of federations and confederations and noted that under the provisions of the political Constitution these organizations could call strikes, and indeed last year had called three general strikes. He emphasized that the current Government fully respected the right of social protest and that measures were not taken by the Ministry of Labour to restrict this right. With regard to the regulation of the right to strike in essential services, the Concertation Commission was addressing this matter, but had not reached agreement. He nevertheless emphasized that in practice the right to strike was respected in essential services, as illustrated by the strike which had been going on for 30 days by teachers and health sector workers. In Colombia, the legal personality and registration of workers' organizations were no longer denied. He recalled that his Government promoted social dialogue as a means, not only of diffusing conflicts, but also as a channel for denunciations of violations of trade union rights, without ever undermining the autonomy of parties which wished to submit complaints. He repeated that the Government was open to all initiatives and all cooperation and technical assistance from the ILO. He urged the representatives of workers and employers to reach agreements to improve freedom of association and mechanisms to protect the life of trade unionists, while at the same time resolving issues relating to sectoral bargaining, the regulation of strikes in the public or general services and the labour charter. Finally, he said that the assistance of the ILO would contribute to trade union rights becoming a reality and to Colombia going further down the path of reconciliation.

The Worker members recalled that the gross violations of freedom of association in Colombia were placed as a recurrent item on the agenda of the current committee for more than a decade. They indicated that the ILO, in its entirety, was profoundly concerned at the repeated and permanent violations. The Governing Body was going to examine the measures to be taken on the occasion of the report of the Special Representative of the Director-General whose mandate was going to end soon. Last March, the Worker members within the Governing Body had expressed again their concern in a document that summed up the observations in the second report of the Special Representative of the Director-General at the continued anti-trade union violations and the lack of concrete commitments made by the Government. The document mentioned, among other matters, the continuous impunity of the perpetrators of crimes committed against trade unions, the lack of protection measures for trade unionists, the dismissal of trade unionists by some enterprises, and other acts contrary to Convention No. 87.

In their observations of last year, the Committee of Experts confirmed many of the points mentioned above. In the first instance, the Committee had expressed its deep concern at the climate of violence existing in the country, while taking due note of the report of the direct contacts mission of February 2000 as well as of the report of the Committee on Freedom of Association on the different cases relating to Colombia. They quoted the conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association which stated that "the scale of murders, kidnappings, death threats and other violent acts against trade union officials and members is unprecedented in history".

They indicated that they had the occasion lately to obtain detailed information from their Colombian colleagues on the most recent violations. They gave some statistics: since 1996, 1,557 trade unionists had been murdered; 60 had disappeared; 72 had been kidnapped; and 1,670 had received direct death threats. While in 2000, 136 trade unionists had been assassinated, representing an increase of 59 per cent in comparison to 1999. Since the beginning of 2001, during the period from 1 January to 30 March, 46 trade unionists had been assassinated. The Committee of Experts recalled that even if that violence were an endemic phenomenon, the fact of trade union leaders constituted a fundamental factor in such assassinations. The same was true for the kidnappings which were aimed, in particular, at the social and economic partners.

In its observation, the Committee of Experts confirmed, while referring to the 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, that "the guarantees set out in international labour Conventions, in particular those relating to freedom of association, can only be effective if the civil and political rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international instruments are generally recognized and protected". It was only natural for the Worker members to express their deep concern at the deteriorating situation, on the one hand, and at the Government's incapacity to find a solution, on the other hand. They were of the view that the ILO and the Committee of Experts should endeavour to find new solutions to this appalling situation witnessed by the Colombian trade unionists.

They stated that the problem of freedom of association, which was in itself a serious problem, did not limit itself to the attacks against the physical integrity of trade unions. As it was stated by one of our fellow Colombian trade unionists: "While we are mourning our fellow dead trade unionists, others are busy causing the deaths of trade unions." In light of the above remarks, the Committee of Experts made the following comments in the case of the Union of Maritime Transport Industry Workers (UNIMAR) referring to the refusal by some employers' organizations to pay the trade union dues which have been checked off: the dismissal of trade union leaders and withholding of their wages; the dismissal of workers attending trade union meetings; and the blocking of trade union funds. They further indicated that the phenomenon described above was not isolated, according to the information made available to the Committee. The Worker members were of the view that the practices aimed at directly threatening trade unionists, and rendering impossible the exercise of freedom of association constituted the second aspect of the case.

The third aspect related to legal reforms. In their comments, the Committee noted with satisfaction the adoption of Act No. 584 of 13 June 2000. In that regard, the Worker members indicated that they could associate themselves with the abovementioned evaluation because the new law responded effectively to a large number of points contained in the comments made by the Committee for a number of years. However, there were pending elements, or elements that were not in compliance with the Convention, such as the conditions set on nationality, the restrictions imposed on the freedom of trade union activities, and expressed their wish that some of the above points would be mentioned in the conclusions. They noted that the Government was committed to remedying the situation in a tripartite framework.

They confirmed that the Worker members could be satisfied if the provisions specified in the Labour Code could be the only ones to be referred to. Unfortunately, the other coin of Colombian reality was painful and serious, and required an absolute prioritization by the Committee. The continued impunity vis-à-vis the assassinations and other acts of violence perpetrated against trade unionists and the anti-trade union practices had obliged once again the Committee to adopt a firm attitude towards the Government to ensure the application in practice of Convention No. 87, and above all, to guarantee the most fundamental rights, such as the right to life.

In view of the ILO's multiple efforts deployed in the past, the Worker members expressed the wish that the ILO strengthen its position on the matter. They expressed the hope that the conclusions of the Committee regarding the case be set aside in a specific paragraph. To ensure efficiency vis-à-vis the aborted attempts of the past, the Worker members had submitted the following requests to the Government: (a) the guarantee of freedom of action and the right to opposition by trade union organizations; (b) the initiation of a real process of social dialogue with a view to promoting a climate of social peace and observance of the rights of each and every person, and thereby seek a consensus on the measures to be taken to bring the Labour Code in full conformity with the provisions of the Convention; and (c) ensure an effective protection against the acts of violence, relating to the death threats and the assassination of trade unionists as well as the kidnapping of the social and economic partners. In that regard, they indicated the necessity of taking the appropriate measures to put an end to the impunity of the perpetrators of such crimes. In conclusion, the Worker members had expressed the wish that the Committee endorse in its conclusions the request submitted to the Governing Body in respect of sending a Commission of Inquiry to Colombia, or seek another appropriate mechanism to achieve the same purposes; in other words, to ensure concrete and tangible progress in the fight against the appalling spiral of violence witnessed by the country and, in particular, by the trade unionists.

The Employer members recalled that the case of Colombia was an extremely serious case which had been discussed by the Conference Committee on various occasions. In its comments, the Committee of Experts had rightly stated that the existing context in the country, namely the climate of violence, constituted a serious obstacle to the exercise of the right to freedom of association. The Committee of Experts had noted with deep concern the climate of violence which existed in the country. It had also referred to the conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association and the report of the direct contacts mission which visited the country in February 2000, as well as to the allegations made by various trade unions. The Government representative had openly acknowledged the current situation in the country and had welcomed any proposal that might be made in that respect. The Employer members agreed that it was of crucial importance to find solutions to remedy the situation, and they therefore welcomed the fact that the Government representative had not shown a similar attitude to that demonstrated on previous occasions when the case had been discussed by the Committee, when an attempt had been made to deny the gravity of the situation. This already constituted a positive signal. Moreover, they agreed with the statement made by the Government representative that it was not only trade unions which suffered from the climate of violence, but also employers, politicians and, in the final analysis, society as a whole. They added that the situation was also unprecedented in that the Government had concluded agreements with the guerrillas and paramilitary forces indicating which group exercised power in certain areas of the country.

Nevertheless, the Employer members observed that the Committee of Experts had noted some progress over the previous year with the adoption of Act No. 584 on 13 June 2000. The Act had repealed or amended a number of the provisions on which the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee had been commenting for many years. The Committee of Experts had therefore cited Colombia in the general part of its report as a case of progress in relation to the application of the Convention. The amendments concerned provisions such as the former requirement that, for the registration of a trade union, the labour inspector needed to certify the absence of other unions; the requirement to have Colombian nationality in order to hold executive office in a trade union; and the need to be of Colombian nationality to be a member of a delegation submitting a list of claims to an employer.

With reference to the fact that the new Act had not addressed other legislative provisions on which the Committee of Experts had commented, and particularly on the right to strike, the Employer members recalled their position that the right to strike was not derived from the Convention and that no legislative action was therefore necessary on that point. Noting the information that draft legislation on the right to strike had been prepared during the direct contacts mission in February 2000, they pointed out that it was for the Government to decide whether or not it would adopt legislation respecting the right to strike. In the view of the Employer members, the adoption of such legislation was not indispensable for the application of the Convention.

In conclusion, the Employer members emphasized that, in view of the overall situation in the country, it was important for consultations to be held between the Government and the social partners so that they could endeavour to find solutions to remedy the situation in so far as possible.

The Worker member of Colombia had listened attentively to the statement made by the Minister of Labour of Colombia. It was obvious that the situation of workers in the country had not worsened, since the Minister had sided with the most vulnerable sector, namely the workers. Today, more than ever, it was necessary to duly recognize positive factors because in the climate of violence surrounding the people of Colombia, democratic gestures and conduct facilitated the difficult task of national reconstruction. However, he considered his duty to inform the Committee of several facts that could help to better understand the situation in Colombia. He pointed out that Mr. Wilson Borja, president of the National Federation of State Employees, who had miraculously survived an attack on his life on 15 December 2000 in Bogotá, was present at the Conference Committee. His colleague, Wilson, was a prime example, or unfortunately a poor example of how certain factions of the extreme right settled political, social and labour disputes by resorting to murder and violence. He emphasized that during the first five-and-a-half months of 2001, 46 unionists had been murdered and that there was no light at the end of the tunnel. He wished to be sincere and fair, stating that workers were also concerned by the current policy leading not only to the murder of trade unionists, but also to the extermination of trade unions that continued to be the target of a variety of attacks to eliminate them and thereby destroying all possibilities for collective organization, collective bargaining and the exercise of the right to strike. It was very important to make people aware that the situation with regard to freedom of association was serious. The following facts spoke for themselves:

-- In 1997, 23 workers were fired by the enterprise Telecom of Bogotá for exercising their right to strike. Three of those fired were union leaders who were present in the room today. They had not yet been reinstated despite the Ministry of Labour's repeal of the resolution declaring the strike to be illegal, and on which the enterprise had relied to justify the firings and the denial of reinstatement. He hoped that the court justices present would take due note of this fact and would act accordingly.

-- In the last two years, over 120 trade union leaders at the national and regional levels of the National Penitentiary Institute had been fired for exercising their right to protest, in an environment of the most absurd impunity. The situation was so severe that this trade union, which once had 7,000 members, now had less than 1,000. He cited additional problems, including the application of Law No. 617, thousands of firings in the public sector, as well as the closing of enterprises, as a result of the accord between the Government and the IMF.

-- The situation with regard to freedom of association, collective bargaining and the right to strike was presently so serious that currently it was not the workers but the employers who were presenting petitions to the trade unions creating an absurd and unacceptable policy of managerial counter-demands which gave rise to the strikes called by of the workers of Bavaria and the Red Cross. He noted that yesterday the national Congress in a significant gesture, had approved, through the initiative of the Government, a security statute which would make the situation even more critical.

-- During the course of the week, an agreement was reached in the Bavarian strike. The Red Cross dispute was still ongoing.

He added that it would be practically impossible to achieve peace in his country if mechanisms that fully guaranteed the right to life, human rights, freedom of association, the right to bargain collectively and employment stability, among other things, were not urgently implemented.

He concluded by asking the Government to indicate: (a) the reasons for not having implemented the labour statute, which constituted a constitutional mandate; (b) the reason why essential public services had not yet been defined; (c) why Colombian employers were so vehemently opposed to the development of collective bargaining by sector of economic activity; and (d) what was the objective of promoting counter-demands. He considered that, while it should take a positive view point, the Committee should nevertheless place its conclusions in a special paragraph.

The Employer member of Colombia said that the Colombian employers condemned the violent acts which affected social harmony in his country and undermined economic development and the stability of the democratic institutions essential to a State governed by the rule of law. In particular, he deplored the attack on Wilson Borja, the prominent trade union leader, just as he deeply regretted the deaths of trade union members and social leaders, victims of decades of internal armed conflict to which a solution was being sought through political negotiation. He acknowledged the Government's efforts to move forward in the peace process with the FARC and to find solutions to the differences with the ELN. International cooperation in recent years had been a valuable support in continuing down that road. At the time of the humanitarian exchange of kidnapped soldiers and police officers for imprisoned and sick FARC guerrillas, the Employers believed all should agree to respect international humanitarian law and end attacks on the civilian population. The cost of the internal conflict was very high. In Colombia 27,000 people a year were murdered, most of them young people. Approximately 15 per cent were victims of the conflict. The country invested some 2.5 per cent of GDP annually in fighting insurgency and civil defence. Economic growth would have been 2.5 per cent a year higher than actually recorded historically if security conditions had been comparable to those of neighbouring countries. The Employers found signs of confidence in current economic indicators: single-digit inflation; a high real exchange rate; a substantial fall in interest rates; control of smuggling; an increase in international reserves; and reduction in the fiscal deficit and export growth. GDP growth in the previous year was 2.8 per cent, after negative growth of 4 per cent in 1999.

As for the support given by the ILO to the work and consultations of employers, workers and governments, he expressed the view that the support given by the multidisciplinary technical team in the Regional Office left no room for dissension on subjects such as employment, social security, vocational training, quasi-fiscal incentives related to employment, modifications to labour law and the definition of essential public services. The process of consultation and conclusions must continue and the Employers were keen to continue the process with the presence and support of the ILO. It was clear from the reports on the activity of the Special Representative of the Director-General of the ILO in Colombia that the Government and other state institutions needed to implement more effective programmes to protect trade union members under threat, quickly identify those responsible for crimes against workers and employers, and intensify the fight against all forms of violence which threatened the country's democracy and social institutions. He expressed his conviction that a stronger presence of ILO officials in Colombia and permanent contact with the representatives of the different social sectors would make a positive contribution to the peace process. He therefore saw the political and technical support of the Organization as beneficial. The Employers welcomed the regional tripartite negotiating tables that had been set up in the country, and the creation of the Special Commission to process complaints to the ILO, such that they were not dealt with outside the country and consensus solutions could be found. In that respect, he considered it essential that the national Government should regulate the mechanism for the employers' organization to provide information in its defence in the complaint proceedings.

In summary, the country was surmounting its economic structural problems and the social indicators showed progress, but there remained an enormous collective challenge to overcome the internal conflict that destroyed lives and properties, held back growth and affected democracy and its ethical viability. He declared that the duty of his generation was to explain and resolve the factors that linked it to a violent past and open the door to a pluralist, sharing, inclusive and prosperous society.

Finally, he wished to convey the words of the President of the Colombian Employers' Association, ANDI, when his daughter, who had been kidnapped by the FARC was released: "Having Juliana back home gives us hope that peace in the country is possible if society strives for it by setting aside any differences, and uniting around the Government and the negotiating table. As ever, I shall continue to serve this cause, which is the cause of Colombia."

The Worker member of the United States reaffirmed that there was no question that the focus of the case under review was the fundamental, violent and tragic failure to comply with the Convention by Colombia. However, all the governments in the international community, and particularly his own, needed to assume appropriate responsibility for the human reality, tragedy and literally, flesh and blood, which provided the foundation for the comments of the Committee of Experts. Nevertheless, such international collective responsibility did not excuse Colombia. Indeed, it morally compelled the international community represented in the Conference Committee to accord the case the extraordinary attention which it deserved. All those governments which were funding Plan Colombia, and particularly his own Government, had to acknowledge and assume responsibility for the impact of the Plan on the application of the Convention. Moreover, he called upon his Government to take the real situation with regard to labour and human rights in Colombia into account in the formulation of the Andean Trade Preferences Act for the current year.

While acknowledging the points raised in the report of the Committee of Experts concerning the reforms made in the country pursuant to the adoption of Act No. 584, he emphasized that these changes in themselves did not go to the root of the extremely serious violations of freedom of association in the country. The improvements in the Labour Code were totally eclipsed by the following instances of fundamental non-compliance with the Convention. Firstly, the amendment to section 486 concerning the obligation for trade union leaders or representatives to produce records and evidence was still unreasonable, and was not remedied by the provision that a superior individual or organization in the trade union structure should give the green light to the authorities. Secondly, the current legislation was a major obstacle to the establishment of collective bargaining by sector as it continued to demand that trade unions attain the absolute majority in each and every company in an industry to have the right to conclude a sectoral agreement. Thirdly, the country lacked the inspection and enforcement capacity to prevent and remedy anti-union discrimination. There were only some 270 labour inspectors to cover over 300,000 enterprises. Moreover, labour inspectors often lacked the basic vehicles and equipment needed to perform their duties and were often deterred by being declared military targets. Fourthly, collective pacts, or in other words agreements between individual workers and their employers, were not subject to collective bargaining by unions and were often used to obstruct the organization of labour. The Ministry of Labour exercised little or no oversight over these practices, with severe implications for the application of Conventions Nos. 87 and 98. Finally, he emphasized that the central issue of non-compliance continued to be the assault on the physical integrity of Colombian trade unionists. In that respect, he said that the reference by the Committee of Experts to the finding by the direct contacts mission that "in general the status of trade union leader is a fundamental factor in these assassinations" should once and for all disprove the assertion made by the Government in the past that the assassination of trade unionists was not systematic, but the result of the endemic violence in the country. Paramilitary forces in Colombia had very recently made the chilling announcement that trade unionists were targets simply because of what they did. He noted that since the decision of the Governing Body last year which established an ILO office in Bogotá headed by the Director-General's special representative, the impunity had only continued. Over 136 trade unionists were assassinated in 2000, and well over 46 in the first six months of this year, with the perpetrators still not yet brought to justice.

He therefore appealed to the humanity and conscience of the members of the Committee, and especially the Employer members, in the name of the most basic labour and human rights, to consider doing nothing less than citing the case in a special paragraph of its report and recommending that the ILO do everything within its power to help resolve the situation, which might include the appointment of a commission of inquiry.

The Worker member of Côte d'Ivoire indicated that it was clear from the statement of Colombia's Minister of Labour that the Government had no responsibility for the murders, death threats and kidnappings of trade unionists. Moreover, the Minister of Labour had appealed to the International Labour Office and international community to help Colombia emerge from the cycle of violence in which it was immersed. After listening to the Minister's statement, the Worker member questioned why the Committee of Experts and the Committee on Freedom of Association had made such comments and such a report when the Government was beyond reproach. He nevertheless mentioned that the statement of the Worker member of Colombia had quickly reminded him of the gravity of the situation in Colombia.

Assassinations had become an institution. Not a month passed by without the murder of yet another trade unionist. The Government was the guarantor of public and individual freedoms, and therefore must take all measures possible so that trade unionists might carry out their activities in freedom. While it was true that Convention No. 87 provided for the right of freedom of association, even so, it was necessary to be alive to exercise that right. Union activism was carried out by and for the living, not the dead. The Government must therefore protect civil and political rights. The report of the Committee of Experts had been clear on this point. He emphasized that, each Conference that passed saw the numbers of murdered grow larger, without the Government ever being able to say concretely who murdered them and why. In June 2001, 40 deaths had already occurred - how many would be dead by the end of the year? It was high time for the international community to make greater efforts in helping to find a definitive solution to the Colombian problem and end the killings in Colombia. He fully supported the recommendations made by the Worker member of Colombia.

The Worker member of Argentina regretted that once again the Committee had to deal with the serious situation faced by workers in Colombia. He noted with consternation and deep anguish that the office of trade union executive was grounds for murder. Life and personal freedom were under permanent threat in that country, indeed, there had been 46 trade union murders in the current year. In addition, against that dramatic background, the Government was implementing labour laws which were not in conformity with the ILO Conventions, restricting the right to strike and the full exercise of trade union freedom. There was no doubt that the prohibition of the right to strike in a long list of services, which were not strictly essential and covering a very wide range of activities, was a direct and clear way of preventing the workers involved from striking, aggravated by the lack of alternative ways of resolving collective disputes and the imposition by the Ministry of Labour of arbitration as the only channel for resolving conflicting interests.

He further indicated, as reported in the Committee, that employers used those negative government labour policies to make working conditions even more insecure, by terminating existing collective agreements in order to depress wages and achieve working conditions which better served their economic interests. He underlined that the gravity of the situation in Colombia brooked no further delay. The Committee's decision should be firm and fair. It could not be accepted that situations such as that reported in Colombia should persist. The life, health and freedom of the workers was a high price demanded of peoples.

The Worker member of the United Kingdom listed 47 reasons why the case of Colombia should be noted in a special paragraph of the Committee's report. All of the following 47 murders had been committed this year:

-- 10 January 2001, Edgar Orlando Marulanda Ríos (SINTRAOFAN), murdered

-- 17 January 2001, Miguel Antonio Medina Bohórquez (SINTRENAL), murdered

-- 17 January 2001, Tello Barragán Aldona (vice-president of Sindicato de Loteros del Magdalena - SINDTRALOPE), murdered

-- 18 January 2001, Arturo Alarcón (ASOINCA, affiliate of FECODE), murdered

-- 21 January 2001, Jair Cubides (Sindicato de Trabajadores del Departamento del Valle - SINTRADEPARTAMENTO), murdered

-- 24 January 2001, José Luis Guette (president of SINTRAINAGRO), murdered

-- 26 January 2001, Walter Dione Perea Díaz (ADIDA, affiliate of FECODE), murdered

-- 26 January 2001, Carlos Humberto Trujillo (ASONAL JUDICIAL, Buga chapter), murdered

-- 28 January 2001, Elsa Clarena Guerrero (ASINORT, affiliate of FECODE), murdered

-- 28 January 2001, Carolina Santiago Navarro (ASINORT, affiliate of FECODE), murdered

-- 8 February 2001, Alfonso Alejandro Naar Hernández (Asociación de Educadores del Arauca - ASEDAR, affiliate of FECODE), murdered

-- 11 February 2001, Alfredo Flórez (Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de la Industria del Cultivo y Procesamiento de Aceites y Vegetales - SINTRAPOACEITES), murdered

-- 12 February 2001, Nilson Martínez Peña (Sindicato de Trabajadores de la Palma de Aceite y Oleaginosas - SINTRAPALMA), murdered

-- 12 February 2001, Raúl Gil Ariza (Sindicato de Trabajadores de la Palma de Aceite y Oleaginosas - SINTRAPALMA), murdered

-- 16 February 2001, Pablo Padilla (vice-president of SINTRAPROACEITES, San Alberto chapter), murdered

-- 16 February 2001, Julio Cesar Quintero (SINTRAISS, Barrancabermeja chapter), murdered

-- 20 February 2001, Cándido Méndez (Sindicato de Trabajadores de la Industria Minera y Energética - SINTRAMIENERGETICA, Loma chapter), murdered

-- 22 February 2001, Edgar Manuel Ramírez Gutiérrez (vice-president of SINTRAELECOL, Norte de Santander chapter), murdered

-- 23 February 2001, Lisandro Vargas Zapata (ASPU, Atlantic chapter), murdered

-- 1 March 2001, Víctor Carrillo (SINTRAELECOL, Málaga chapter), murdered

-- 3 March 2001, Darío Hoyos Franco, murdered

-- 12 March 2001, Valmore Locarno (president of SINTRAMIENERGETICA), murdered

-- 12 March 2001, Victor Hugo Orcasita (vice-president of SINTRAMIENERGETICA), murdered

-- 13 March 2001, Rodion Peláez Cortés (ADIDA), murdered

-- 18 March 2001, Rafael Atencia Miranda (Unión Sindical Obrera de la Industria del Petróleo - USO, Casabe chapter), murdered

-- 20 March 2001, Jaime Sánchez (SINTRAELECOL, Santander chapter), murdered

-- 20 March 2001, Andrés Granados (SINTRAELECOL, Santander chapter), murdered

-- 21 March 2001, Juan Rodrigo Suárez Mira (ADIDA, affiliate of FECODE), murdered

-- 24 March 2001, Luis Pedraza (USO, Arauca branch), murdered

-- 24 March 2001, Ciro Arias (president of Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de la Industria Colombiana de Tabacos - SINTRAINTABACO, Capitanejo chapter), murdered

-- 26 March 2001, Robinson Badillo (Sindicato de Trabajadores y Empleados de Servicios Públicos, Autónomos e Institutos Descentralizados de Colombia - SINTRAEMSDES, Barrancabermeja chapter), murdered

-- 27 March 2001, Mario Ospina (ADIDA, affiliate of FECODE), murdered

-- 27 March 2001, Jésus Antonio Ruano (Asociación de Empleados del Instituto Nacional Penitenciario - ASEINPEC), murdered

-- 2 April 2001, Ricardo Luis Orozco Serrano (first vice-president of ANTHOC Nacional), murdered

-- 4 April 2001, Aldo Mejía Martínez (president of Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de Acueducto, Alcantarillado y Obras Públicas - SINTRACUEMPONAL, Codazzi chapter), murdered

-- 11 April 2001, Saulo Guzmán Cruz (president of Sindicato de Trabajadores de la Salud de Aguachica), murdered

-- 26 April 2001, Francisco Isaías Cifuentes (ASIOINCA, affiliate of FECODE), murdered

and his wife, L. María Fernandez Cuellar, murdered. Their five year-old son was gravely injured in the attack.

-- 27 April 2001, Frank Elías Pérez Martínez (ADIDA, affiliate of FECODE), murdered

-- 2 May 2001, Darío de Jésus Silva (ADIDA, affiliate of FECODE), murdered

-- 9 May 2001, Juan Carlos Castro Zapata (ADIDA, affiliate of FECODE), murdered

-- 10 May 2001, Engeniano Sánchez Díaz (SINTRACUEMPONAL, Codazzi chapter), murdered

-- 14 May 2001, Julio Alberto Otero (ASPU, Caqueta chapter), murdered

-- 16 May 2001, Miguel Antonio Zapata (president of ASPU, Caqueta chapter), murdered

-- 21 May 2001, Carlos Eliécer Prado (SINTRAEMCALI), murdered

-- 25 May 2001, Henry Jiménez Rodríguez (SINTRAEMCALI), murdered

-- 29 May 2001, Nelson Narváez (SINTRAUNICOL), murdered

He added that he had refrained from citing the names of the more than 50 colleagues murdered between the opening of the last Conference and the end of 2000. Nor had he been able to submit the names of all the children who had lost their fathers or mothers or both in these attacks. Nor had he given the names of the 69 teachers who had received death threats this year. Finally, he regretted that the Government representative had failed to address the issue of the impunity with which these murders had been carried out. There could be no rule of law while such impunity persisted in the context of what appeared to be a systematic attempt to eliminate the trade union leadership in Colombia, aggravated by an increasing level of attacks against ordinary trade union members. However, thankfully, Wilson Borja was present in the Committee, as were other Colombian trade union colleagues who had survived repeated assassination attempts. The names of the colleagues he had cited bore silent witness to a situation which needed to be reflected in a special paragraph of the Committee's report.

The Worker member of France observed that the climate of violence prevailing in Colombia against trade union leaders was unprecedented in history according to the Committee on Freedom of Association. The Government and the Employer members pleading in favour of peace civil liberties and human rights - and quite rightfully so - seemed, however, to use a different discourse when it came to trade unions. In practice, many employers impeded through various means (including the confiscation or the retention of trade union contributions) the free exercise of trade union activities. On the Government side, although one should take note of the improvements made to the Labour Code regarding the abusively restrictive provisions denounced by the Committee for years, other problems remained, like the absolute prohibition of strikes called by federations and confederations despite the fact that the right to strike had been recognized in this country. The fact that the right to strike was nevertheless undermined with exaggerated limitations and exceptions in particular in the non-essential public services, constituted an intervention in the right of workers to organize their activities and an excessive legal hindrance on trade union rights. The strike was the ultimate means at the hands of workers to enable them to promote their demands when all other means had been exhausted. Although the exercise of this right could eventually become subject to certain legal rules, its prohibition constituted a fundamental hindrance on freedom of association by virtue of Article 3 of the Convention and also Article 8 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The right to strike was one of the legitimate activities of trade unions and fell within the field of application of the Convention on an equal footing with the other trade union activities.

Although the Employers' group had unanimously decided to wage a premeditated escalation and a systematic confrontation against the constant case law of the various supervisory organs of the ILO in a more subtle way since 1998, this should not oblige this Committee to admit this unjustified turnaround. Without the right to strike, freedom of association would be mutilated and weakened and the workers would be left without an effective means of defence against employers. To admit this revisionist proposition to exclude the right to strike from the field of application of freedom of association would also contravene national practices in the area of legal interpretation, which consisted in interpreting texts in light of their fundamental objectives. Moreover, common state practice (based on the criteria contained in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969), often cited by the Employer members) was, but for a few exceptions, not to exclude the right to strike from trade union legislation, but to recognize it and regulate it sometimes excessively.

The Convention did not exist in a legal void and was a component of international law and more specifically, human rights. In this respect, he regretted the fact that the Employer members of his country had supported a restricted interpretation of freedom of association and thanked the Government member of Germany for his analysis which was perfectly honest from an intellectual point of view and should have been supported at least by all the other Member States of the European Union. He underlined that the Government of Colombia had the obligation to promote freedom of association and to do everything in its power to protect trade union members and human rights activists and, more generally, all citizens, from the violations committed by the paramilitary troops and the various armed groups which committed these assassinations, torture and kidnappings and had forced hundreds of thousands of people to become refugees in their own country.

He concluded by inviting the Government to accept the Commission of Inquiry which had been examined by the Governing Body for three years now in order to help the Government meet the requirements of the Convention. He also invited the Government to have recourse to the technical assistance of the Office in order to receive help in the implementation of the conclusions and recommendations of the Committee. Finally, the speaker reaffirmed the strong support of the French trade unions towards the Colombian people and trade unionists in the courageous and permanent action for the respect of fundamental rights and liberties, like the right to life, in the framework of the rule of law and through peace and reconciliation. The seriousness of this case justified its inclusion in a special paragraph of the Committee's report.

The Worker member of Mexico noted that, as illustrated by their statements, the workers of the world were deeply concerned by the murders of Colombian workers. The climate of violence existing in the country formed part of a broad campaign by the extreme right to silence leaders who raised their voices against the status quo.

He added that in their condemnation of these acts, the Worker members wished to recall that in the year 2000 there had been an increase of 63 per cent in the number of murders in comparison with 1999, even without taking into account death threats and disappearances of trade unionists. He added that, during the course of the year, 46 trade unionists had been murdered, which demonstrated once again the total impunity existing in the country. Despite national and international pressure, the Government had made no real effort to resolve the situation and guarantee the full exercise of the fundamental right of freedom of association. He believed that it was important to draw attention to the constant violations of freedom of association, the right to collective bargaining and the right to strike, in addition to the other matters raised by the Committee of Experts in its report. Finally, he emphasized that the situation as described justified the inclusion of the case in a special paragraph of the report and the establishment of a commission of inquiry, or any other measure which could resolve the problems of Colombian workers.

The Worker member of Sweden welcomed the very clear description provided by the Committee of Experts in its report of the climate of violence in which Colombia lived, and particularly all of its trade unionists, social activists and defenders of human rights. She added that the Government had committed itself on several occasions in the Committee to achieving full compliance with the provisions of the Convention. However, in reality, violence grew with every passing day and the situation continued to deteriorate rapidly. There was no freedom of association in Colombia. The alarming number of murders, kidnappings, death threats and other acts of violence against trade union leaders and members had reached an unprecedented level in the history of the country. The Committee of Experts had noted that the group most affected by this violence was that of trade union leaders. Since the beginning of the year, a total of 47 trade unionists have lost their lives as a result of this brutal and almost incomprehensible violence.

The Government tended to portray itself as a victim. But the real victims were the 2,500 or more trade unionists who had died between 1987 and 2001. She urged the Government to assume its responsibilities and take measures to bring an end to impunity. Political will, determination and greater comprehension of the contribution that the ILO was offering were all necessary. She acknowledged the prudence of the current Minister of Labour in view of the present situation, particularly since other ministers were bitterly criticizing the trade unions and their calls for the social, economic and political reform of the country.

The Committee of Experts continued to call for the Government to recognize and protect the civil and political rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Convention, and especially those related to freedom of association. In conclusion, she expressed the firm hope that the Committee's conclusions on the case of Colombia would be included in a special paragraph of its report.

The Worker member of Cuba said that the sheer volume of information on this tragic situation and the statements made by the members of the Committee were so eloquent that there was no need to repeat them. Nevertheless, he felt the need to emphasize that pressure needed to be exerted on the Government through all possible channels to encourage it to take the decisions which would ensure that the impunity that prevailed in the country was brought to an end. The Government needed to guarantee that impunity ceased whatever the situation in the country. Employers and their organizations needed to take on a large part of the responsibility for eliminating violations of trade union rights. Finally, on behalf of the Central Organization of Workers of Cuba, he expressed his solidarity with the members of the Colombian trade union movement, which was honoured by the dignity with which it was combating these extremely difficult conditions.

The Worker member of Uruguay acknowledged the sincerity with which the Minister of Labour of Colombia had made his declaration and he indicated that he sensed the Minister's sensitivity for the subject. He emphasized the observations made by the Committee of Experts regarding the prohibition of the federations and confederations from calling strikes; the prohibition to call a strike for sectors providing essential services and those providing a wide range of services not necessarily essential; the possibility to dismiss the trade union leaders who had intervened or participated in an illegal strike and the power of the Minister of Labour to refer disputes to arbitration when a strike lasted more than a specific period of time.

He pointed out that, despite the direct contacts mission that took place in February 2000, draft legislative texts had been prepared to amend the abovementioned provisions. These amendments had not been made. He asserted that, even though the Minister had informed that these provisions had never been used during his term in office, they were still applicable in the legal system of Colombia. He considered that a special paragraph incorporating the conclusions resulting from the discussion be added, and that any other measures that could contribute towards the resolution of the conflict be taken. He pointed out that on 12 December 2000 12 hired assassins tried to kill the Worker member Mr. Wilson Borja and two of his bodyguards. The investigation led the investigators to link the case to individuals such as active military personnel, retired military personnel, active police personnel and five persons belonging to the paramilitary, including the chief of the latter, in the city of Bogotá. These elements proved that a relationship between the members of the public forces and the paramilitary groups continued to exist. This contradicted the argument forwarded by the Government that these cases were isolated in an attempt to hide the murders of trade unionists and social leaders planned at the headquarters of the Colombian public forces. He confirmed that, since the month of September, the Minister of the Interior had known about the situation and, despite this, had denied to provide increased protection for workers. He emphasized that, during the year 2000, 129 trade union leaders had been murdered and that, in the course of the present year, 46 trade union leaders had already been murdered. He further stated that a trade union leader, Jorge Ortega, in exile in Uruguay, decided to return to his country, and as Vice-President of the CUT was murdered. To this day nothing had come out of the investigation. For this reason, it was important that in this process everyone genuinely participated in the fight against impunity.

He also noted that the agreements between the IMF and the Government had contributed to the restriction of trade union activities. He pointed out that the Colombia Plan tended to foster war rather than peace. He emphasized that changes needed to be made by the people and for the people. Change was necessary for peace, just as peace was necessary for change. Everyone should participate in this process. In conclusion, he hoped that the Governing Body would in the next days appoint a Commission of Inquiry.

Another Worker member of Colombia said that it was true that the Colombian Government was currently pursuing a peace policy and that in the past, the trade union movement had supported and committed itself to such policy. At the same time, however, it should be noted that the Colombian Government, while pursuing a peace process with the guerrillas, allowed and promoted policies which took away with one hand and what they gave with the other. He remarked that on 14 June 2000, the Congress of the Republic had passed a national security bill, introduced by the Government itself, which gave the military forces judicial police powers and allowed them to make arrests without trials and revived the inaptly named "cohabitation" which had been declared unconstitutional in the past, leaving the way open to the paramilitary. He said that the passing of that law had been a backward step to times which they believed that they had left behind when, on evidence cleverly concocted by military intelligence, many trade union members and social militants were tried and arrested arbitrarily. Moreover, that very week, the head of the paramilitary in Colombia had said that he would kill trade unionists because they obstructed work through their many protests. And that assertion had become reality for many trade unionists, including the speaker. Compounded, the Worker member declared in his case and many others, that members of the armed forces, both active and reserve, and members of the paramilitary were involved.

He indicated that the Government had allocated resources of US$2.5 million, but not only for trade unionists but for a number of people under threat in human rights organizations and non-traditional political sectors. He claimed that although murder in Colombia was indiscriminate, that could not be an argument for allowing those responsible to escape punishment. Killing was bad enough but it was worse when the State did not investigate, let alone punish. The Government acted as a victim of the war and not as one of the parties responsible for the war. The level of impunity for violation of human rights was 97 per cent. Certainly stoppages had not been made illegal in recent times, and that was important. He warned that fulfilling an international and constitutional obligation could not compensate for facts such as the 47 trade unionists murdered that year, over 500 others forced into exile abroad and the large number of trade union members and social activists made to move within the country.

He also said that there was no real protection for trade unions. Many had disappeared as a result of the action of employers who considered that organized labour threatened their interests. There were frequent public statements by public officials blaming trade unions for crises in public bodies, thus creating a public opinion hostile to the trade unions. Workers were stigmatized for exercising their rights, and workers' organizations, both members and officials, were pilloried. He wondered how anyone could expect murderers to cease their criminal action when some leading figures, such as the Minister of Finance, stigmatized and singled out trade unionism and workers in general, through the media, as being responsible for the crisis in Colombia.

In the last two years a new phenomenon had been emerging. In many cases where the courts had ordered the reinstatement of trade union members who had been illegally dismissed from their posts, the orders had been ignored. Such, for example, was the case of Caja Agraria and the Banco Agrario, which had been jointly ordered in the final decision to reinstate a number of workers protected by law, and those orders had been disregarded. The same situation had arisen with the Empresa de Telefonos de Bogotá telephone company. He added that the situation was compounded by an economic policy which, in order to fulfil the extended agreement with the International Monetary Fund, the Government had sought to impose without prior consultation using it to bring about the dismissal of a large number of state workers without providing them with any re-employment scheme, cutting their social benefits, adversely reforming their pension scheme and reducing health and education benefits, also by the creation, through a reform of the law, of a frontier labour scheme to encourage the presence of export processing zone companies. Many workers that had been dismissed from public entities were re-employed by subcontractors without any employment contract, outside the social security system and, of course, without any opportunity to organize. He warned that despite reforms introduced in the previous year, the prohibition of strikes in non-essential public services remained, social protest continued to be repressed by the police, federations and confederations were prohibited from calling strikes, it was still possible to dismiss trade union members and trade union officials who had joined a strike that had been declared illegal, the Ministry of Labour was empowered to declare a strike illegal, the power of the Minister of Labour to refer a dispute to arbitration when the strike had continued for over 60 days, as well as other provisions which were contrary to the Conventions to which Colombia was a party.

In the view of the Colombian trade union movement, all the foregoing justified putting the conclusions of the discussion in a special paragraph and, furthermore, urging the Committee on the Application of Standards to urge the Governing Body to establish a commission of inquiry on the complaints that had been submitted to it, or seek other mechanisms to resolve the grave situation of freedom of association in Colombia.

The Government member of Sweden, speaking on behalf of the Member States of the European Union and of Norway and Iceland, emphasized that the European Union was deeply concerned about the persistent grave situation of attacks and threats against trade union members in Colombia, with nearly 50 union members assassinated already in 2001. The alarming development of the previous year, when the number of murdered union members increased by 100 per cent compared with 1999, was therefore continuing. The Committee on Freedom of Association had stated that "the scale of murders, kidnappings, death threats and other violent acts against trade union officials and members is unprecedented in history" and that "in general the status of trade union leaders is a fundamental factor in these assassinations".

It was clear that, to a large extent, the paramilitary groups were responsible for the violence against trade unions. However, the European Union also emphasized the responsibility of the Colombian Government to protect its citizens from any kind of violence and to bring any perpetrators of violations against human rights and workers' rights to justice. The European Union urged the Government of Colombia to take urgent and effective steps to ensure the legal and physical protection of those affected. It also called upon the Government to continue its effort to effectively combat the paramilitary groups and to take concrete action to dismantle these groups by arresting, prosecuting and punishing those involved in such activities. The European Union also strongly deplored the persistence of impunity in Columbia, especially in regard to human rights and workers' rights violations, which was a fundamental obstacle to the observance and implementation of human rights in the country.

The violence had now reached such a level that every effort possible had to be made by all the parties concerned to mitigate the escalation of the violence. She urged the Colombian Government and the social partners to cooperate constructively in trying to find every possible measure to address effectively the violence affecting trade union members. She also believed that the ILO could and should play a more proactive and supportive role, assisting the Colombian Government and the social partners in their efforts to develop protection mechanisms, find solutions and at the same time monitor the situation. Since the case of Colombia was on the agenda of the Governing Body following the Conference, and the report of the Special Representative of the Director-General for cooperation with Colombia would be discussed there, the European Union would address the operational aspects of the case in that context. Finally, she emphasized that the only long-term sustainable solution to the situation in Colombia was peace. The European Union therefore welcomed and supported every positive step taken in support of the peace process.

The Employer member of Panama said that the daily violence in Colombia, which was seemingly meaningless, was repugnant and of great concern to everyone. This human shame lay behind the action taken to bring it to an end. Its victims were in their great majority of humble extraction and were not therefore accorded space in the international press. But the blood that had been spilled in the countryside, streets, homes and public places of Colombia cried out for justice. Such deep-rooted violence had its origins in Colombian history. Civil wars had flourished and spread their seeds throughout the nation for over a century and a half. However, he expressed a certain scepticism that a special paragraph in the report of the Conference Committee, a commission of inquiry or the unanimous condemnation of the Conference would really have any effect in putting an end to the abominable spiral of crime. There was as yet no solution and the walls of the Conference room would probably hear many new versions of the human atrocities committed in Colombia. New avenues needed to be explored to find an end to this Latin American nightmare.

He proposed that assistance should be provided for the reconstruction of the judicial system as the only manner of cementing brotherhood and peace. By way of practical action, he emphasized measures to strengthen the links between the social partners and dialogue to achieve peaceful co-existence. The various forms of social protest action should be acknowledged and respected, without prejudice to third parties. Progress in the peace process should be promoted, with emphasis on the observance of human rights and a political solution to the armed conflict. And initiatives should be promoted in the fields of labour legislation, collective bargaining, the definition of essential public services and human resources development. Action in these areas would contribute to giving hope back to Colombians and to developing and having faith in a new judicial system which would provide a secure and trustworthy channel through which levels of conflict could be reduced. He added that the denunciation of a collective labour agreement did not constitute a violation of freedom of association, but was an expression of the desire to renegotiate the agreement reached, which had proven to be inadequate. This formed part of the right to negotiate the working conditions that the partners considered to be most appropriate for their collaboration.

The Government member of Mexico expressed her grave concern at the level of violence in Colombia, which had affected the lives of numerous trade unionists as well as other sectors of the population, including state civil servants, religious leaders and employers. She noted that the Colombian Government had been making enormous efforts to guarantee the safety of union members, despite the difficulties it had faced in this regard. She urged the ILO to maintain and strengthen its cooperative relationship with the Colombian Government so that this climate of violence in the world of work could be overcome.

Another Government representative of Colombia stated that she felt it was her duty to take the floor because, as a Colombian citizen, she deplored the painful situation in her country. It was difficult for others to comprehend the conditions in which Colombians were living and for them to truly grasp the gravity of the situation other than those living in these conditions. Those fighting for human rights, trade unionists, employers, judges and any other persons participating in the process of rebuilding the country, as well as their families, were constantly threatened with loss of life and limb. Only those who faced this reality on a daily basis were in a position to characterize it as a true "hell" . She reiterated that not everyone in Colombia lacked positive and constructive qualities, and that the country was relying on young people who hoped for peace in the future. She called for a genuine and efficient support to help rebuild her country.

The Government representative of Colombia had taken due note of the statements of the workers, employers and government representatives. He indicated that the delegation representing the Government of Colombia included, in addition to him, three Justices of the Colombian High Court, as well as six members of the Seventh Committee on Labour Issues of the House of Representatives of the Colombian Congress. He considered that each of the statements made in the Committee had the objective of finding a solution to the conflict in Colombia, as well as putting an end to the climate of impunity in the country. He indicated that the Colombian Constitution established the principle of separation of powers and expressed the hope that the presence of the Justices would permit a more in-depth examination of the issues before the Committee.

He did not wish to rebut any of the statements made, and he invited the Colombian workers and employers to sit down with the Government to analyse each of the statements and observations made in the Conference Committee. He indicated that each of the sectors involved should undertake to resolve the conflict to the extent possible in order to strengthen social dialogue and cooperation. He confirmed once again that he would continue to act within the framework of the Colombian Constitution and the ILO Conventions. However, there were issues that depended upon other state agencies, as well as upon political will for the establishment of a dialogue between employers and workers. He considered that Colombian judges and legislators should also attend the meeting mentioned.

He indicated his willingness to accept any proposals by the Committee that could help to resolve the different problems in the country, and put an end to acts of violence against union members as well as to impunity. It was not the Government's policy to persecute union members or those fighting for the protection of human rights. This, however, did not mean that the State was denying the possibility that public officials had participated in criminal acts connected with paramilitary activity, drug trafficking and corruption, nor did he deny that other sectors had been involved in this type of criminal activity. In this regard, he noted that the investigation into the attempted assassination of Mr. Wilson Borja had proven that those responsible were members of the armed forces, and indicated that these individuals had been removed from their positions. He added that it was in the interest of the President of Colombia to remove all persons involved in the criminal acts mentioned from public service and that similar measures be applied in all sectors of Colombian society. He reiterated his Government's complete willingness to examine the different initiatives taken on the path to achieving peace in the country.

With regard to the law enacted by Congress, which had been characterized as a law that would promote repressive measures and which implied a return to security policies adopted in the past, he pointed out that this legislation was not the result of a Government initiative, but had its origins in the legislature. Moreover, he questioned the constitutionality of the law in question. He considered that the road to peace lay not with the path taken by the military nor with exercising options directed towards war. Rather, the road to peace lay through the exercise of options directed towards peace. He expressed the hope that the Colombian Constitutional Court would hold that this law was contrary to the fundamental principles contained in the national Constitution.

He regretted having to appear before the Committee in his capacity as Minister of Labour to examine such a painful issue, noting that many government officials had also been the targets of violent acts by those paramilitary groups that considered the President as well as the High Commissioner for Peace to be allies of the guerrillas in light of the negotiations currently being conducted in the ongoing search for peace. He would have preferred to appear before the Committee to address the same issues that affect other developed countries, issues which also affected Colombia. However, he would not attempt to evade his responsibility and he intended to find some way, some solution to put an end to this situation. He believed that all sectors in Colombia should unite to rebuild the country. He recalled that an example of this unity had taken place in 1991 in the Colombian Constitutional Assembly, when all sectors set aside the differences dividing them and successfully established a new constitution for the country.

He requested the cooperation and presence of the ILO and the international community, particularly political assistance, to assist Colombia in achieving peace. He recalled that, in 1980, in his former capacity as union member, he had spoken against the persecution carried out in the country against workers that defended their rights. He considered that, often, for ideological reasons, his warnings had not been heeded. Consequently, the current situation could lead to the destruction of the State if an agreement between the parties were not achieved. He stated once again that all measures were possible to establish democracy and to prevent this situation from continuing in the future. These crimes were a source of shame for humanity, and he reiterated that the unions had always had his support, and even employers knew he would take care to protect the rights of workers.

The Worker members considered that their preliminary statements and the comments made by different speakers had stated their objectives clearly. In light of the tragic situation in Colombia, the Worker members requested that the Conference Committee observe a minute of silence in honour of their murdered brethrens.

The Committee kept one minute of silence in honour of all victims of violence in Colombia.

The Worker members thanked the Committee and requested that the conclusions of this case be included in a special paragraph of the report of this Committee.

The Employer members noted that the discussions had been quite emotional, which was justified in view of the gravity of the situation in the country. Priority had not therefore been given to discussing issues of labour law, since the reasons for the situation in the country were not to be found in the state of the national legislation, but in the climate of violence, as illustrated by the number of victims who were mourned by the country. They therefore concluded that the ILO's contribution could only be small and that the problems had to be solved by Colombians themselves, particularly since it was not within the ILO's competence to intervene in the problems that had been described. However, the Committee should express its deep concern in its conclusions and the demands of the Worker members should be taken into consideration. Although the contribution that the Conference Committee and the ILO could make to resolving the situation was naturally only minor, it nevertheless constituted an important signal. Finally, they supported the proposal of the Worker members to include the conclusions of this Committee on this case in a special paragraph.

The Committee took note of the oral information provided by the Government representative and the subsequent debate. In its previous conclusions the Committee had observed with great concern the significant and persistent discrepancies between the legislation and practice, and the provisions of the Convention had given rise to several complaints to the Committee on Freedom of Association, and a complaint submitted by a number of Worker members to the International Labour Conference in June 1998, under article 26 of the Constitution of the ILO relating to non-observance of Convention No. 87.

The Committee noted that the Committee of Experts had expressed its deep concern at the climate of violence which existed in the country and the scale of murders, kidnappings, death threats and other violent acts against trade union members which was unprecedented in history. The Committee strongly condemned the murders and acts of violence against trade union officials and kidnappings of employers, despite the Government's efforts to protect them. The Committee took note of the information on the development of the peace plan and hoped that there would be progress as a result, in particular with regard to compliance with international humanitarian law and the pursuit of negotiated political solutions to the internal conflict. The Committee, which had discussed that case on many occasions in the past, observed that the Committee of Experts had noted significant progress in the application of the Convention with respect to the majority of the legislative provisions that had been referred to the Committee of Experts. The Committee further observed that the Government was committed to promoting measures relating to the other provisions on which the Committee of Experts had commented. The Committee considered that strengthened social dialogue between the social partners would be the best way of conducting that activity.

The Committee noted with concern that many complaints concerning violent acts and discrimination against trade unionists continued to be submitted to the ILO. The Committee recalled that full respect for civil liberties was essential for the application of the Convention. The Committee emphasized that the climate of impunity in the country represented a serious threat to the exercise of trade union freedom. The Committee urged the Government to take further steps to bring legislation and practice into full conformity with the Convention in the near future. It expressed the firm hope that the Government would provide a detailed report to the next meeting of the Committee of Experts with news of greater progress in legislation and practice to ensure the application of that Convention and recalled that it could call on the technical assistance of the Office in the context of that process. The Commission expressed the firm hope that at its next meeting it would be in a position to take note of real progress in the country's trade union situation. In that respect, the Committee noted that the complaint submitted under article 26 of the Constitution of the ILO was pending before the Governing Body. The Committee expressed the hope that the Governing Body at its next meeting would take appropriate, effective and necessary measures to deal with that complaint.

The Committee decided that its conclusions would appear in a special paragraph in its report.