Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Uganda (Ratification: 2005)

The Committee takes note of the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) received on 1 September 2014 concerning issues raised by the Committee as well as allegations of arrests during the 1 May 2013 celebrations. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard. The Committee also takes note of the observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) received on 1 September 2015, which are of a general nature.

The Committee notes the Government’s reply to the observations of the ITUC received in 2012 and 2013, relating to allegations of government interference in union elections, police intervention during a strike and restrictions to freedom of assembly imposed by the Public Order Management Act 2013. As to the allegations of interference in union elections, the Committee recalls that any intervention by the public authorities in trade union elections runs the risk of appearing to be arbitrary and thus constituting interference in the functioning of workers’ organizations, which is incompatible with Article 3 of the Convention. As to the other allegations, the Committee notes that the Government indicates that it intends to regulate public gatherings and enforce section 5 of the Public Order Management Act 2013 for purposes of achieving harmony and peace in the country. The Committee observes that the Public Order Management Act 2013, which regulates the exercise of the rights to freedom of assembly and to demonstrate, establishes certain requirements (including timeframes for giving notice of the meetings and time limits during which public meetings can take place), some of which have been criticized by the ITUC. The Committee also notes that the Act provides that organizers of public meetings, who fail to comply with the requirements of the Act, commit an act of disobedience of statutory duty which is punishable under the Penal Code with imprisonment. The Committee recalls that: (i) the right to organize public meetings and processions constitutes an important aspect of trade union rights; (ii) the authorities should resort to calling in the police in a strike situation or demonstration only if there is a genuine threat to public order; (iii) no penal sanction should be imposed on workers for having carried out a peaceful strike or demonstration; and (iv) the implementation of the Public Order Management Act 2013 should not impair the exercise of the rights enshrined in the Convention. The Committee trusts that the Government will ensure respect for these principles and, to that end, it requests the Government to discuss with the social partners concerned the application and impact of the Public Order Management Act 2013, and to provide information in this regard.

Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention. Legislative matters. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to take measures to amend or repeal various provisions of the 2006 Labour Unions Act (LUA) and the 2006 Labour Disputes (Arbitration and Settlement) Act (LDASA):

• -Section 18 of the LUA (process of registration of a labour union shall be completed within 90 days from the date of application). The Committee notes that the Government indicates that it is difficult to estimate the average duration of the registration procedure, and that 90 days is the maximum duration anticipated for the whole process to be completed before a certificate is issued to the applicant. Recalling that registration procedures that are overly lengthy may constitute serious obstacles to the establishment of organizations (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 75), the Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 18 of the LUA so as to shorten the time frame for registration of a trade union.
• -Section 23(1) of the LUA (interdiction or suspension of union officers by the Registrar). The Committee notes that the Government indicates that: (i) Article 4 of the Convention only prohibits the dissolution or suspension of workers’ and employers’ organizations, but not the removal of the officers of such organizations; (ii) the intention of section 23(1) of the LUA is to remove the officer in question to allow investigations to take place and justice to prevail; and (iii) therefore, according to the Government, there is no need for amendments. The Committee recalls once again that any removal or suspension of trade union officers, which is not the result of an internal decision of the trade union, a vote by members, or normal judicial proceedings, seriously interferes with the right of trade unions to elect their representatives in full freedom, enshrined in Article 3 of the Convention. Provisions which permit the suspension and removal of trade union officers by the administrative authorities are incompatible with the Convention. The Committee further recalls that only the conviction on account of offences the nature of which is such as to prejudice the aptitude and integrity required to exercise trade union office may constitute grounds for disqualification from holding such office. The Committee therefore reiterates its request to the Government to take steps to amend section 23(1) so as to ensure that the Registrar may only remove or suspend trade union officers after conclusion of the judicial proceedings and only for reasons in line with the principle cited above.
• -Section 31(1) of the LUA (eligibility condition of being employed in the relevant occupation). The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that it has contacted the trade unions so that they can express their views on this issue. The Committee welcomes the consultations on this matter and requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 31(1) in conjunction with such consultations so as to introduce flexibility either by admitting as candidates for union office persons who have previously been employed in that occupation, or by exempting from that requirement a reasonable proportion of the officers of an organization.
• -Section 33 of the LUA (excessive regulation by the Registrar of an organization’s annual general meeting; contravention subject to sanction under section 23(1)). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that steps are being taken to bring section 33 of the LUA into conformity with the Convention. The Committee welcomes the Government’s commitment to address this issue and requests it to provide information regarding the steps taken to repeal section 33 so as to guarantee the right of organizations to organize their administration.
• -Section 29(2) of the LDASA (responsibility for declaring a strike illegal lies with the Government). The Committee notes that the Government indicates that the responsibility for declaring a strike illegal lies with the Labour Officer, who is an officer of the Government, and that therefore any action by such officer is an action of the Government. The Committee recalls once again that the responsibility for declaring a strike illegal should not lie with the Government, but with an independent body that has the confidence of the parties involved. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary steps to amend this section of the Act in compliance with this principle.

Concerning Schedule 2 of the LDASA (list of essential services), the Committee notes that the harmonization of the list of essential services in the LDASA with that in the 2008 Public Service Act (Negotiating, Consultative and Disputes Settlement Machinery) will be undertaken by the new Labour Advisory Board, which was appointed in October 2015. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this respect.

Finally, the Committee takes note of the Labour Disputes Arbitration and Settlement (Mediation and Conciliation) Regulations (2012), which are attached to the Government’s report, and notes with interest that section 18 provides for an expeditious hearing in the case of disputes involving essential services.